The URL can be used to link to this page

Planning Commission Agenda 06-06-2017 AGENDA REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, June 6th, 2017 - 6:00 p.m. Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center Commissioners: John Alstad, Brad Fyle, Sam Murdoff, Marc Simpson, Lucas Wynne Council Liaison: Charlotte Gabler Staff: Angela Schumann, Steve Grittman (NAC), Jacob Thunander, John Rued 1. General Business A. Call to Order B. Consideration of approving minutes a. Special Meeting Minutes – May 2nd, 2017 b. Regular Meeting Minutes – May 2nd, 2017 C. Citizen Comments D. Consideration of adding items to the agenda 2. Public Hearings A. Continued Public Hearing – Consideration of a request for Rezoning to Planned Unit Development, a request for Development Stage Planned Unit Development for Vehicle Sales and Rental, Auto Repair – Minor, and Accessory Office and Retail Uses in a B-3 (Highway Business) District Applicant: FRHP Lincolnshire, LLC B. Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for amendment to Conditional Use Permit for Development and Final Stage Planned Unit Development for entrance and building additions in a B-2 (Limited Business) District Applicant: Lemke, Lenore – CentraCare Health Monticello C. Public Hearing - Consideration of request for Amendment to Mills Fleet Farm Planned Unit Development for proposed changes to signage. Applicant: Ramerth, Tim - Widseth Smith Nolting D. Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for rezoning to Planned Unit Development, Development Stage Planned Unit Development, and Preliminary Plat for Spaeth Industrial Park for a multi-lot industrial development in an I-2 (Heavy Industrial) District. Applicant: Spaeth, Ken E. Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for Amendment to Planned Unit Development, Development Stage Planned Unit Development, and Preliminary Plat for Chelsea Corner for Office, Service, and Warehouse Uses in the Red Rooster Planned Unit Development. Applicant: Red Rooster Properties, Inc. F. Public Hearing - Consideration of a request to amend the Monticello Zoning Ordinance Chapter 5, Section 3 for regulations for accessory use outdoor storage in industrial districts Applicant: City of Monticello G. Public Hearing - Consideration of a request to amend to the Monticello Zoning Ordinance Chapter 4, Section 3 – Fences and Walls; Chapter 4, Section 5 for regulations for multi-tenant building signage, Chapter 5, Section 3 for regulations on Accessory Use Dwellings, and Chapter 5, Section 4 for regulations for Temporary Uses – Food Trucks Applicant: City of Monticello 3. Regular Agenda A. Consideration to appoint a Planning Commission representative to the Ellison Home Task Force. B. Consideration of preliminary comment and feedback on the draft Downtown Small Area Plan. C. Consideration of the Community Development Directors Report 4. Added Items 5. Adjournment 1 MINUTES SPECIAL/JOINT MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, May 2nd, 2017 - 5:00 p.m. Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center Present: John Alstad, Brad Fyle, Marc Simpson, Brian Stumpf, Jim Davidson, Bill Fair, Charlotte Gabler, Lloyd Hilgart Absent: Sam Murdoff, Lucas Wynne Staff: Angela Schumann, Steve Grittman (NAC) 1. Call to Order Chairman Brad Fyle called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. 2. Concept Proposal for amendment to Planned Unit Development for detached townhome lots in an R-2 (Single and Two Family Residential) District at Carlisle Village 2nd Addition. Applicant: Carlisle Village, LLC Steve Grittman introduced the proposal which was to replat a portion of the Carlisle Village Second Addition plat. It was originally platted for attached townhomes, however the applicant proposes detached homes. Grittman stated that the original development of townhomes included 92 units, with eight already completed. Seventeen additional townhouse units have been approved as a part of the first phase of development which have remained undeveloped. The proposal would instead include the construction of fourteen detached homes. The homes would exist on small lots within a large common area and be subject to the rules of an association for maintenance. Grittman commented that the entire Carlisle Village project included 240 residential units with a mix of housing from small and large lot single family and attached townhomes. Steve Grittman discussed staff comments and recommendations. He noted that if the proposal were to be approved the applicant would need to work with the association for access and maintenance. Grittman explained concerns with neighborhood continuity with mixing the townhomes with single family homes and the idea for Carlisle Village to have consistent groups of housing styles. There would also be concerns with the area neighboring the proposed development that is currently vacant in terms of the future plan for development. At present, it is platted as an outlot. Grittman also noted that while there is a reduction in overall density with the proposal, it is close to what was originally proposed. He also explained that the homes and lots are narrower than what is typical for single family housing options in Monticello and within Carlisle Village. Architectural compatibility also needs to be considered. The overall access to lots and utilities also needed to be looked at prior to accepting the proposal. Grittman reviewed the comments on behalf of the City Engineer. Water service disconnections would need to occur for the reduction of units. He also noted the engineer’s comment related to the created wetlands existing on the outlot parcel. Lastly, it was mentioned the need to review stormwater management guidelines according to the MPCA requirements. 2 Brad Fyle asked the applicant to give a brief presentation of their proposal. Kent Roessler, Paxmar, introduced himself and stated that he has worked in the community and surrounding area before. He explained the idea was to split up the previously approved townhomes and place ten foot spacing between each of them. Roessler reassured the boards that the proposal has become popular for homebuyers. Under the previous approval, Paxmar could move forward with the four and five unit townhomes with the appropriate building permits or they could build the detached homes if approved by the boards. The applicant noted that these proposed homes would be a better build and the price point could be pushed an additional ten to twenty percent. These units would be dressed up better than the previously proposed with architectural brick and stone. The basements would be unfinished allowing the property owner to complete if wanted. Roessler indicated that they are proposing a decrease of 17% less units, but an increase in assessed value. The townhome assessed value is around $150,000 per unit, where the proposed units could reach above $200,000. He noted that units would be a mix of two and three bedroom homes, most with two bathrooms, and two to three stall garages. The buildings would be completely energy efficient and ranging from three different floor plans with around ten different frontage designs. Roessler explained that he would like this development to join the existing HOA if possible. The HOA would maintain the lawn care, snow removal, irrigation, and necessary insurance. The homeowners would be responsible for exterior maintenance because of the individual units. Brian Stumpf asked what the proposed timeline would be for the development surrounding the pond along Gatewater Drive. Roessler stated they wanted to complete this proposal first and then work on completing the remaining with similar detached units. Bill Fair asked how many relocations for water would need to occur. Roessler stated zero with two stubs possibly needing to be capped. Fyle asked about the area of the homes. Roessler explained the total square footage of about 2,000 square feet would include the unfinished basement area. Charlotte Gabler asked for the difference between this proposal and the Sunset Ponds development. Roessler noted that they would be similar, but the biggest difference would be a 26-28 foot garage depth (two to four feet more than Sunset Ponds). Gabler stated that larger style homes would better match the area. Gabler also asked about the orientation of the four proposed homes facing Gatewater Circle. Roessler stated that was the direction that the townhomes were originally approved. Fyle asked whether the homes would be spec or pre-sale. Roessler stated a majority of the homes would be built as spec, but he would be open to pre-sale as well. Lloyd Hilgart stated concern with the appearance and transition by having two existing townhomes already built in the area. Roessler indicated with required screening, the variation would be less distinguishable. 3 Jim Davidson also echoed concern with varying from the townhome concept that was started. Roessler noted increased landscaping and architectural materials would complement the area and an increase in popularity would be seen. Gabler asked if a compromise by constructing attached townhomes east of Bakken Street and continue with plans for the remaining detached homes. Roessler stated that he was open to the idea and would proceed with either attached or detached units. David Norling, 8608 Gatewater Drive, expressed appreciation for the detached homes. Jon Morphew, 8586 Gatewater Drive, preferred the detached homes especially behind his property. Morphew asked if these homes came with finished decks. Roessler confirmed that they came with the opportunity for a deck or could build their own with the approval of the HOA. Morphew asked if the Boards could require decks to be built. Grittman stated the Planning Commission and City Council could wish to require that. Sally Bair, 8554 Gateway Circle, explained they were in conversations with Paxmar about their plans and were in favor of the proposal. Bair explained the HOA’s openness to having the additional homes included with the HOA. Fyle and Simpson stated no concerns with the proposed development. Bill Fair recommended having a standardization for what decks and patios (especially second story) should look like. Hilgart indicated that the decks should remain similar to each other and blend. Roessler stated that shouldn’t cause much concern and often times homeowners like the option to build their own decks. He reminded the Boards that the HOA has specific standards decks must comply to. 3. Adjournment MARC SIMPSON MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 5:49 P.M. JOHN ALSTAD SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 8-0. Recorder: Jacob Thunander ____ Approved: June 6th, 2017 Attest: ____________________________________________ Angela Schumann, Community Development Director 1 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, May 2nd, 2017 - 6:00 p.m. Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center Present: John Alstad, Brad Fyle, Sam Murdoff, Marc Simpson, Lucas Wynne Council Liaison: Charlotte Gabler Staff: Angela Schumann, Steve Grittman (NAC), John Rued 1. General Business A. Call to Order Chairman Brad Fyle called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. B. Consideration of approving minutes a. Special Meeting Minutes – April 4th, 2017 MARC SIMPSON MOVED TO APPROVE THE SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF APRIL 4TH, 2017. MOTION SECONDED BY SAM MURDOFF SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 5-0. b. Regular Meeting Minutes – April 4th, 2017 MARC SIMPSON MOVED TO APPROVE THE REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF APRIL 4TH, 2017. MOTION SECONDED BY SAM MURDOFF SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 5-0. C. Citizen Comments None. D. Consideration of adding items to the agenda Marc Simpson asked to add an item at the end of agenda. 2. Public Hearings A. Public Hearing – Consideration of a request for Rezoning to Planned Unit Development, a request for Development Stage Planned Unit Development for Vehicle Sales and Rental, Auto Repair – Minor, and Accessory Office and Retail Uses in a B-3 (Highway Business) District Applicant: FRHP Lincolnshire, LLC Brad Fyle announced that the applicant requested tabling action. Special Joint Meeting Mississippi Room - 5:00 PM Concept Stage Planned Unit Development for Detached Townhome Lots Applicant: Carlisle Village, LLC 2 Brad Fyle opened the public hearing. Hearing no comments, the public hearing was closed. SAM MURDOFF MOVED TO TABLE ACTION TO THE JUNE 6TH, 2017 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. MARC SIMPSON SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 5-0. B. Public Hearing – Consideration of a request for Comprehensive Plan Amendment for ‘Places to Shop’ to ‘Places to Work’ and a request for Rezoning from a B-4 (Regional Business) District to a I-1 (Light Industrial) District Applicant: Jim Bowers and John Chadwick Steve Grittman stated two parcels were included in the land use application request. The properties are referred to as the Bowers/Chadwick parcels and lie between I-94 and Chelsea Road. It is west of Moon Motorsports and adjacent to the City’s industrial development park. Grittman noted that the area was previously rezoned from industrial to commercial due to the economy at the time. Since commercial development has not occurred, the applicants sought to re- guide the property from “Places to Shop” to “Places to Work” and rezone from B- 4 (Regional Business) District to I-1 (Light Industrial). Grittman explained that requests for re-guiding and rezoning, the City examines a number of factors that support the change. Surrounding land use patterns, adequate utilities and roadways, and City policies for Economic Development were all mentioned. The City notes that there is becoming a tighter demand for industrial land and they have been receiving inquiries routinely. Grittman noted that the request would be consistent with the industrial land designations located to the south and west of the parcels. Chelsea Road is a major collector road and is able to accommodate large amounts of traffic. At the current time the land use is compatible with the area, but the City is also working on an interchange land study. Grittman explained that the plan is looking at the intersection of County Road 39 and I-94, which could have implications for development of the Bowers/Chadwick’s parcels. Staff believes that the industrial designation would be compatible, but a possible interchange at County Road 39 and I-94 could cause commercial development pressure directly at the interchange location. Staff noted concerns with outdoor storage that would be visible from the freeway that would be allowed under the I-1 District zoning request. Staff therefore recommended rezoning the parcels to IBC (Industrial and Business Campus) District. Grittman noted that the setbacks and uses were similar with the two industrial districts, but outdoor storage would be restricted and site and building design requirements also vary between the two. City staff felt that a visual transition from the freeway to the west and south industrial would be complimentary by having the parcels rezoned to IBC, as the City’s industrial park has in place covenants which restrict outdoor storage and require a higher design 3 standard. Staff recommended re-guiding the parcels from “Places to Shop” to “Places to Work” and rezoning to IBC. Brad Fyle asked if the property abuts the freeway right-of-way line. Grittman confirmed and stated there was not a designated easement along the freeway other than the standard drainage and utility easement. Charlotte Gabler commented that she believed either industrial zoning designation would match the area. Marc Simpson asked if the main difference between the IBC and the I-1 District was outdoor storage. Grittman confirmed, stating additional requirements would also apply for building materials and site plan. He also mentioned that the IBC allows a few business related uses such as office and hospitality uses. Sam Murdoff asked if there was an idea of when a possible interchange would be constructed. Grittman stated that until work has been completed on Highway 25 planning, the work on west interchange planning has been put on hold. Marc Simpson asked what the red dotted line around the parcels meant. Grittman stated that the parcels were located in the Special Use Overlay District. Fyle opened the public hearing and invited the applicant to speak first. Wayne Elam, Commercial Realty Solutions, explained that each parcel is 19 acres. He provided history of the reason for the request and stated that he sat in on an EDA Meeting, where Jim Thares noted the City was running short on industrial land. There were requests out there from industrial developers looking for 5 to 20 acres of land and with current industrial needs could not be met with Otter Creek. Following the meeting, Elam met with John Chadwick and Jim Bowers to discuss the City’s need for more industrial land. Elam recommended that they request rezoning from business to industrial. Elam echoed concerns industrial developers have with the shape of the lots in Otter Creek Industrial Park and said that rectangle shaped lots were most cost effective for industrial development. Elam stated the City has 317 acres of commercially zoned land with 80 acres of commercial land on the interstate. He expected the commercial development to occur mostly south of Highway 25 or near Mills Fleet Farm. Elam also indicated that they are requesting I-1 and noted some of the differences with the I-1 and IBC Districts. He stated that he didn’t feel this location would be good for a hotel. He expressed concerns with precluding outdoor storage. He reiterated the importance of the I-1 designation and offered a better screening requirement as a tradeoff. John Chadwick, 4477 Manitou Lane, Excelsior, explained the history of the parcels. Chadwick mentioned the benefits of the rezoning that would occur with 4 industrial development especially because of the location of the lift-station. Chadwick expressed that the IBC was not consistent in the area, and that I-1 is located adjacent to the property. Gabler stated the City and IEDC are working on increasing the size of the industrial park or land availability. Wayne Elam stated there is currently IBC land located in the City, with 13 vacant, acres east of the Monticello Workforce Center and 7.5 acres in between Mills Fleet Farm and UMC. He noted that there has not been any development on IBC land. Angela Schumann responded that when the City recodified the Zoning Ordinance, the previously distinguished I-A District was removed, while the IBC was added. Land that was designated I-A was either zoned to IBC or I-1. Schumann confirmed that there has been no construction on the IBC districts. Brad Fyle commented that he didn’t want to recommend approval of a rezoning if the owner didn’t want it rezoned. Elam stated that he was speaking on behalf of the owners and that they wanted to rezone away from commercial to industrial, either IBC or I-1. Elam reiterated the importance of rezoning to I-1. Gabler asked if a future applicant could apply for a PUD for the parcels and request outdoor storage. Schumann confirmed and added that under the I-1, outdoor storage could be as large as the principal building. She noted that staff are currently working on a revised set of standards for screening and outdoor storage that would come forward at a future meeting. Schumann stated that staff recommend staying with the IBC District because of the restrictions on outdoor storage due to the visbilityof the double fronting lots. Fyle expressed he was leaning towards rezoning to IBC because of visibility. Elam added that with the changes that were soon to be proposed for outdoor storage and screening, he suggested increasing the height of screening. Murdoff asked for examples of outdoor storage that could be seen in this area. Grittman responded that it depended on the development. Lucas Wynne stated that the decision is based on the desire for how Monticello wants to present itself in the future. Wynne expressed desire for a stricter set of zoning standards due to visibility, but also had concerns with restricting the type of industrial development. Elam noted that if the City rezoned the area to IBC that they also needed to look where they would put additional I-1. 5 Murdoff agreed that there was a need for I-1 with outdoor storage, but wasn’t sure if those parcels were the right area. He expressed that a rezoning could possibly be a disservice as there currently is no development plans for the area. Schumann noted that the City is very aware of the need for industrial land. She expressed that the City has a Comprehensive Plan which guides areas for places to work. Schumann than talked about outdoor storage, stating that it didn’t have to do strictly with the site appearance, but rather the amount of jobs, wages, and tax base. She noted the importance of balancing outdoor storage with increasing jobs and tax base. MARC SIMPSON MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION PC-2017 - 008 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO “PLACES TO WORK”, AND ORDINANCE NO. 6XX FOR REZONING FROM B-4 (REGIONAL BUSINESS) DISTRICT TO IBC (INDUSTRIAL BUSINESS CAMPUS) DISTRICT AS PROPOSED BY CITY STAFF. BRAD FYLE SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 5-0. Schumann stated that the recommendation would be subject to a super-majority vote by the City Council on May 22nd. 3. Regular Agenda A. Consideration of the Community Development Directors Report Angela Schumann thanked Council Member Gabler for being on top of things at the legislature. Schumann noted the League of MN Cities resource information on legislature items such as interim ordinances was provided in the packet. Schumann also noted that on Thursday, May 4th the Small Area Study Steering Committee would be meeting. She expected that a plan would come before the commission in a June or July meeting. There would be a public open house at West Bridge Park. Information about educational sessions was also provided. 4. Added Items Marc Simpson asked Schumann if the Planning Commission could move to electronic agendas. Schumann responded saying that the City Council was trying them out first. She believed that the City Clerk stated within the next few years that the EDA and Planning Commission would also transfer over. 5. Adjournment MARC SIMPSON MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 7:07 P.M. SAM MURDOFF SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 5-0. Recorder: Jacob Thunander ____ Approved: May 2, 2017 6 Attest: ____________________________________________ Angela Schumann, Community Development Director Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/2017 1 2A. Continued Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for Rezoning to Planned Unit Development, a request for Development Stage Planned Unit Development for Vehicle Sales and Rental, Auto Repair – Minor, and Accessory Office and Retail Uses in a B-3 (Highway Business) District. Applicant: FRHP Lincolnshire, LLC (NAC) Property: Legal: Lot 1, Block 1 Maas Addition, together with Lot 1, Block 1 Camping World First Addition PID: 155225001010, 155243001010 Planning Case Number: 2017 - 011 A. REFERENCE & BACKGROUND Representatives for FRHP Lincolnshire have indicated that it is their intention to provide revisions to previously prepared submittals. The applicant has submitted communication that they are in the process of completing the revised submittals and as such, are requesting to have the application tabled to the July meeting of the Planning Commission. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS 1. Motion to table action on the request and continue the public hearing to the July 11th, 2017 regular meeting of the Planning Commission. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION None D. SUPPORTING DATA None Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/2017 1 2B. Public Hearing – Consideration of a request for amendment to Conditional Use Permit for Development and Final Stage Planned Unit Development for entrance and building additions in a B-2 (Limited Business) District. Applicant: Lemke, Lenore – CentraCare Health Monticello (AS) Property: Legal: Lot 1, Block 1 Monticello Big Lake Community Hospital District Campus Address: 1013 Hart Boulevard PID: 155-208-001010 Planning Case Number: 2017-015 A. REFERENCE & BACKGROUND Request(s): Amendment to Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development for construction expansion on existing hospital campus, including MRI unit, ambulance garage and entrance canopy. Deadline for Decision: June 30th, 2017 (60 days from complete application) Land Use Designation: Places for Community Zoning Designation: B-2, Limited Business The purpose of the B-2 (Limited Business District) is to provide for low intensity retail or service outlets which deal directly with the customer for whom the goods or services are furnished. The uses allowed in this district are to provide goods and services on a limited community market scale and located in areas which are well served by collector or arterial street facilities at the edge of residential districts Overlays/Environmental Mississippi Wild Scenic and Recreational River Regulations Applicable: District Current Site Use: Medical/Clinic Use, CentraCare Health - Monticello Surrounding Land Uses: North: River Street, Single-Family Residential, Mississippi River East: Multi-Family Residential, Mississippi Shores South: Institutional, Monticello Middle School West: Residential, Park Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/2017 2 Project Description: The applicant proposes to complete two phases of minor expansions at the hospital campus. The first phase would include the construction of a new canopy area to the exterior of the hospital with other internal improvements to the main hospital and emergency entrance. The second phase is proposed to include a new ambulance garage and MRI facility. All improvements are proposed to occur on the south (Broadway) side of the property. No changes are proposed to the existing lot boundary. ANALYSIS Ordinance Requirements: Within the B-2 District, Clinics and Medical Services are Permitted Uses, with no additional referenced conditions. As such, only the general provisions of the ordinance apply to the proposal. The CUP for PUD was applied primarily to accommodate the comprehensive sign plan, lot configuration and setbacks, and cross parking and access configurations throughout the site. The B-2 District requires no minimum lot area, with a minimum lot width of 100 feet. The B-2 District requires 30’ front and rear yard setbacks, 20’ corner lot setback and interior side yard setback of 10’. Parking lot setbacks must be at least 6 feet from property lines, and generally are not to be located within drainage and utility easements. Site Plan Analysis The proposed first phase includes the reconfiguration of the primary entrance drive area and construction of an exterior entrance canopy along the existing building front. The applicant will also be making internal building improvements to coordinate with the external changes. The proposed canopy is approximately 66’ in length and will be constructed of a combination of architectural metal and masonry design. The improvements to the exterior will also include new landscaping and sidewalk at the front entrance area. The proposed second phase will include construction of two new facility expansion areas on the south side of the existing building. The first is a 1,765 sf ambulance garage and the second a 1,348 sf MRI facility. The garage will be located in an Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/2017 3 existing vacant surfaced area east of the main hospital entrance. The MRI facility is proposed to be located between the main hospital and office building. That area is currently hard-surfaced and vacant. At the time of the construction of the second phase, the parking area and sidewalk directly in front of the two facilities will be reconstructed. Parking and Access. The applicant has provided a removals and site plan demonstrating traffic and ambulance flow for the proposed facilities. No change is proposed to the main entrance from Broadway into the site. The applicant will lose two stalls from the total number of parking stalls with the reconfiguration and will be required to maintain ADA compliance. The applicant’s narrative suggests that the proposed improvements will serve to create better circulation for the site, improving response time for ambulance services and providing more easily understood customer entrance pick up and drop off points. The site plan also illustrates sidewalk and crossing improvements to the front entrance area from established parking lots. Landscaping. The applicant has provided landscaping plans that show landscaping areas in the parking lot islands, and within the new entrance area. The code requires landscaping quantities based on lot size and building perimeter. For the proposed improvements, the total requirement is 2 evergreen trees and 14 caliper inches of deciduous trees, with 33 shrubs, plus additional shrub requirements in the parking lot islands. The applicant’s plans exceed these requirements, with the exception of the requirement for plantings within the parking lot islands. Staff recommends the relocation or addition of plantings into the parking lot islands to meet the landscaping requirements. Lighting. A photometric plan has been submitted with the proposal. The purpose of photometric review is to ensure that light glare does not impact neighboring residential property or public rights of way. The requirement for footcandles at property line is .5 footcandles for institutional uses. The proposed plan shows compliance with the City’s requirements in this regard. Staff would note that the plans do not illustrate a pole height. Light standards are allowed at a maximum height of 25 feet. The applicant should verify that the light pole will meet this requirement and provide specification detail for building lights so that the requirement for cut-off fixtures may be verified. Signage. The applicant’s narrative states that new signage will be added along the canopy and the face of the existing hospital. However, no sign plan has been provided. The applicant has not specified whether there would be any change to Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/2017 4 existing free-standing signage. As a condition of approval, the applicant is asked to provide a conceptual sign plan prior to Council consideration of the final stage PUD. Building Design. The proposed improvements include a mix of brick and architectural metal. Specifically, the canopy will include pre-cast concrete, brick and aluminum metal materials. The proposed materials are consistent with the ordinance standards and as a condition of approval, will be required to consistent with existing building material colors. It appears that a portion of the east facing elevation plan does not detail materials treatment for the MRI facility. As a condition of approval, the applicant is required to verify building treatments for the visible portion of the MRI building facing east. The ambulance garage and MRI buildings will be faced with brick treatments and include insulated aluminum doors. While the MRI faces Broadway, the noted island delineator plantings, along with existing plantings with the boulevard, will provide some buffering to the streetscape view. Utilities, Grading and Drainage. The City Engineer is reviewing the project for these aspects, and has included a separate report which is incorporated here by reference. Trash Handling. The applicant has indicated that the trash handling is internal, with some storage outside near the loading dock on the north side of the building. As such, the current trash handling process is not impacted by the current proposal. PUD. As a procedural note, the Planning Commission reviews for recommendation the Development Stage PUD; Council will act on the final Stage PUD. As the applicant has applied for both development and final stage PUD at this time, both Development and Final Stage application materials will be presented to the City Council concurrently. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS 1. Motion to approve Resolution #PC-2017-009 recommending approval of the amendment to Conditional Use Permit for Development and Final Stage Planned Unit Development for CentraCare Health Monticello, contingent on compliance with the findings in said resolution and those conditions specified in Exhibit Z. 2. Motion to deny Resolution #PC-2017-009 for amendment to Conditional Use Permit for Development and Final Stage Planned Unit Development for CentraCare Health Monticello, based on findings to be made by the Planning Commission. Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/2017 5 3. Motion to table action on the request, pending additional information as identified by the Planning Commission and staff report. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the amendment to Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development. The proposed uses are consistent with those associated with a Medical/Clinic and the establishment of the PUD for the hospital campus. Subject to compliance with the conditions in Exhibit Z, the plans meet the requirements of the code and reflect consistency with the goals for PUD. D. SUPPORTING DATA A. Resolution # PC-2017-009 B. Aerial Image, Subject Site C. Project Narrative D. Plan Set, including: a. Title Sheet b. Floor Plan c. Elevations d. Removal Plan e. Site Plan f. Utility Plan g. Grading Plan h. Erosion Control Plan i. Landscape Plan j. Details k. Photometrics l. Revised Site Plan m. Colored Elevations E. City Engineer’s Letter, dated May 31, 2017 Z. Conditions of Approval EXHIBIT Z Amendment to Conditional Use Permit for PUD Lot 1, Block 1, Monticello Big Lake Hospital District Campus. 1. Verify materials for exposed wall on east side of the MRI facility. Materials shall be consistent and compatible with the other materials proposed. 2. Revise landscaping plan to meet requirements for island delineator plantings. 3. Applicant shall provide a conceptual wall and free-standing signage plan prior to final stage review by the City Council. Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/2017 6 4. Applicant shall provide a certificate of survey for building permit submittal. 5. Provide specification detail for lighting fixtures to demonstrate compliance with Chapter 4, Section 4 of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance. 6. Applicant shall enter into an amendment to development agreement as may be required for the proposed amendment. 7. Comments of other City Staff, including those within the City Engineer’s letter dated May 31, 2017. CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-009 1 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMEN TTO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR DEVELOPMENT STAGE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR LOT 1, BLOCK 1, MONTICELLO BIG LAKE HOSPITAL DISTRICT CAMPUS WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted a request for amendment to an existing Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development for 1013 Hart Boulevard, legally described as Lot 1, Block 1, Monticello Big Lake Hospital District Campus; and WHEREAS, the applicant concurrently proposes to expand the medical and clinic uses and related accessory uses on the site; and WHEREAS, the site is guided for institutional uses under the label “Places for Community” in the City’s Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment to CUP for PUD is consistent with the long- term use and development of the property for institutional uses; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 6th, 2017 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 PUD provides an appropriate means of furthering the intent of the Comprehensive Plan for the site. 2. The use of the site for an expansion of Medical/Clinic Uses and related accessory uses is consistent with the direction of the Comprehensive Plan for “Places for Community”. 3. The plan for the hospital district campus expansion as proposed through PUD, results in a project that more closely achieves the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan than would the application of the standard zoning regulations. 4. The plan results in development that is compatible and consistent with the existing surrounding land uses in the area. 5. The improvements proposed for the site under the Development Stage and Final Stage PUD are consistent with the intent of the zoning ordinance. CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-009 2 7. The PUD flexibility for the project, including site access and parking, building materials, display, and signage, are consistent with the intent of the City’s economic development objectives, as well as with the intent of the PUD zoning regulations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota, that the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the Monticello City Council approves the amendment to Conditional Use Permit for Development Stage PUD, subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit Z as follows: 1. Verify materials for exposed wall on east side of the MRI facility. Materials shall be consistent and compatible with the other materials proposed. 2. Revise landscaping plan to meet requirements for island delineator plantings. 3. Applicant shall provide a conceptual wall and free-standing signage plan prior to final stage review by the City Council. 4. Applicant shall provide a certificate of survey for building permit submittal. 5. Provide specification detail for lighting fixtures to demonstrate compliance with Chapter 4, Section 4 of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance. 6. Applicant shall enter into an amendment to development agreement as may be required for the proposed amendment. 7. Comments of other City Staff, including those within the City Engineer’s letter dated May 31, 2017. ADOPTED this 6th day of June, 2017, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota. MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION By: _______________________________ Brad Fyle, Chair ATTEST: CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-009 3 ____________________________________________ Angela Schumann, Community Development Director CentraCa re Health Mo nticello - R eq uest fo r Con dition a l Use P ermit fo r Dvlp mt. a n d Fina l Stag e PUD Lt 1, Blk 1 M onticello Big Lake Community Hospital District Campus | 155-208-001010 | 1013 Hart Blvd C reated by : C ity of Monticello 385 ft April 24, 2017 Angela Schuman Community Development Director City of Monticello 505 Walnut Street Monticello, MN 55362 Re: CentraCare Health Monticello - PUD Narrative Dear Angela: As part of our ongoing commitment to provide excellent care to the people of this service area, CentraCare Health Monticello is planning additional improvements to our hospital. The Phase One project will include the redesign of the main hospital and emergency department entrance. The goals are to make room for additional vehicles as they drop-off and pick-up patients and visitors under a protected area from the weather with the new canopy layout. The new entrance vestibule will provide for wide automatic sliding doors for easier access. The new design will open the look of the main entry and make it easier to find when entering the hospital site. There will be new signage on the new canopy and along the face of the existing hospital, but the layout and design has yet to be determined. We are looking for the City of Monticello to provide some flexibility with the final design of all the signage. A signage package will be submitted at a later date. The intent of the new signage will be to provide clear wayfinding as a patient and/or visitor enters the site and the new front entrance for the hospital and emergency department. The public has been asked to change their pattern of entry to the existing building more than once so we will be clear with the new signage so people get to the right place the first time. Internally the organization will be redesigning the lobby to accommodate both inpatient and emergency registration areas and lobbies along with additional seating. The very popular gift shop will be refreshed with some additional space and a more open feel. This Phase One project will start in late July and be completed in Mid-November 2017. The Phase Two project will include creating a new ambulance garage that features a drive through design. This will save precious time rather than having the ambulances back-in to the garage which is their current practice. The timing of this phase has yet to be finalized but we expect it to follow as closely as possible behind the canopy and entrance phase, hopefully no later than spring of 2018. Internally the existing ambulance garage will be made a part of the remodeled emergency department so that rooms can be expanded, provide for designated behavioral health rooms, allow more privacy as it relates to the patient’s experience, and expand an efficient work areas so flow can be maintained. This phase will begin after all exterior work is complete. The Phase Two project will also include the exterior work for an addition to the building. The new addition will house the Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI). This building addition will allow the hospital to provide the latest imaging technology. Our physicians will have better diagnostic tools to better serve the patients of this community. We look forward to continuing our collaborative relationship in making Monticello a great place to live and work. cc: File G:\12571\17049\05 Approvals\01 City\2017-04-24 CCH Monticello PUD NarrativeR.docx Issues and Revisions: Commission No: Drawn by: Checked by: SHEET 1295 BANDANA BLVD N, SUITE 200 ST. PAUL, MN 55108-2735 (651) 642-9200 | FAX (651) 642-1101 www.popearch.com POPE ARCHITECTS, INC. 0"1/2"1" TRUE SHEET SCALE CENTRA CARE HEALTH REMODEL 1013 Hart Boulevard, Monticello, MN 55362 12571-17049 4/21/2017 10:31:37 AM C:\Revit Projects\16015_CentraCareMonticello_PHASES_R16_CENTRAL_czechstone@yahoo.com.rvt A0.1 TITLE SHEET DM MB PROJECT DIRECTORY OWNER CENTRACARE HEALTH 1107 HART BLVD MONTICELLO, MN 55362 PHONE: (320) 251-2700 ext: 58470 CONTACT: LENORE LEMKE ARCHITECT POPE ARCHITECTS 1295 BANDANA BLVD. N. / SUITE 200 ST. PAUL, MN 55108 PHONE: (651) 642-9200 CONTACT: DENTON MACK STRUCTURAL CLARK ENGINEERING CORPORATION 621 LILAC DR. N. MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55422 PHONE: (763) 545-9196 CONTACT: CORY CASPERSON GENERAL CONTRACTOR MCGOUGH CONSTRUCTION 2737 FAIRVIEW AVE N ST. PAUL, MN 55113 PHONE: (651) 634-7747 CONTACT: BRAD SMITH VICINITY MAP CENTRACARE HEALTH MONTICELLO 1013 HART BLVD, MONTICELLO, MN 55362 NORTH 1013 HART BLVD. MONTICELLO, MN P.U.D. CITY SUBMITTAL SET MECH./ ELEC. (OWNER CONSULTANT) DUNHAM 50 S. SIXTH ST. / SUITE 1100 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402 PHONE: (612) 465-7550 CONTACT: KURT THEN (MECH) WILL EVANS (ELEC) SHEET INDEX SHEET NUMBERSHEET NUMBERSHEET NUMBERSHEET NUMBER SHEET NAMESHEET NAMESHEET NAMESHEET NAME GENERAL A0.1 TITLE SHEET ARCHITECTURAL A2.0 OVERALL FLOOR PLAN A3.0 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS AND PERSPECTIVES CIVIL 1 OF 8 REMOVAL PLAN 2 OF 8 SITE PLAN 3 OF 8 UTILITY PLAN 4 OF 8 GRADING PLAN 7 OF 8 DETAILS 8 OF 8 DETAILS PUD CITY SUBMITTAL4/24/17OVERALL CAMPUS PLAN NTS NORTH ELECTRICAL E1 SITE PLAN PHOTOMETRICS 5 OF 8 EROSION CONTROL PLAN 6 OF 8 LANDSCAPE PLAN UP UP DN ACCLIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTIONLIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION EXISTING NURSING HOME (NO WORK) EXISTING CLINIC (NO WORK) LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION CONCRETE STOOP EXISTING ELECTRICAL UTILITY POLE NEW CONCRETE SIDEWALK NEW LANDSCAPE AREA LANDSCAPE AREA NEW LANDSCAPED ISLAND REGIST. 160EA GIFT SHOP 102STORAGE103HSKP 104 ALCOVE 107F STAFF LOCKER 109 HOSPITAL REGISTRATION 110 VESTIBULE 100 SECURITY 111 VOLUNTEER DESK 101A IMAGING WAITING 101C LOBBY 101 ED WAITING 101B ELEVATORS 101D CORRIDOR 123 33'-3 1/4"PHASE ONE "LOBBY" PHASE TWO "EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT" AMBULANCE GARAGE MRI BUILDING PHASE TWO PHASE TWO PHASE ONE "MAIN ENTRANCE" Issues and Revisions: Commission No: Drawn by: Checked by: SHEET 1295 BANDANA BLVD N, SUITE 200 ST. PAUL, MN 55108-2735 (651) 642-9200 | FAX (651) 642-1101 www.popearch.com POPE ARCHITECTS, INC. 0"1/2"1" TRUE SHEET SCALE LOBBY LOBBY MAIN LEVEL KEY PLAN CENTRA CARE HEALTH REMODEL 1013 Hart Boulevard, Monticello, MN 55362 12571-17049 4/21/2017 9:32:28 AM C:\Revit Projects\16015_CentraCareMonticello_PHASES_R16_CENTRAL_czechstone@yahoo.com.rvt A2.0 OVERALL FROOR PLAN DM MB 1/8" = 1'-0" A2.0 1 FIRST FLOOR PLAN - EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT & LOBBY CITY SUBMITTAL 4/24/2017 MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" BRICK COLUMN WRAP - ARCH PRECAST BASE AND ARCH PRECAST CAP MP-1 COMPOSITE ALUMINUM PANELS (TYP.) EXISTING BUILDING NEW ALUMINUM THERMALLY BROKEN WINDOWS WITH INSULATED SPANDREL GLASS EXISTING WINDOWS EXISTING BUILDING NEW PREFINISHED METAL FLASHING (FLASH-1) NEW INSULATED HM DOOR EXISTING EXIT DOOR18" DIA. ARCHITECTURAL PRECAST CONCRETE BOLLARD (TYP) LIGHT FIXTURE (TYP) FB-2 ROWLOCK COURSE RECESSED 1/2" (FB-1) FB-2 FB-1A.F.F.2'-0"OVERFLOW SPOUT ROWLOCK COURSE RECESSED 1/2" (FB-1) ARCHITECTURAL PRECAST CONCRETE SILL. MATCH EXISTING PROFILE AND FINISH. PHASE ONE PHASE TWO MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" CURVED EXISTING WALL 6" DIA. x 48" H PRECAST CONCRETE BOLLARD W/ CONC. PIER (TYP) INTERIOR AT MRI FB-1 FB-2ROWLOCK COURSE 1/2" RECESS INSULATED H.M. DOOR & FRAME NEW INSUL. STEEL O.H. DOOR W/ WINDOW PANEL18'-8 1/4"FB-2 MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" FB-2 FB-1 FB-2 FB-1 FB-1 SEE 1 / B-A3.1 FOR TYPICAL NOTES EXTERIOR MATERIAL FINISH SCHEDULE PCAST - 1 MATERIAL ID MATERIAL MANUFACTURER FINISH COLOR NOTES MP - 1 MP - 2 FLASH - 1 ARCHITECTURAL PRECAST COMPOSITE ALUMINUM PANEL METAL PANEL CAP FLASHING ALUMINUM WINDOW FRAMES FACE BRICK AFS-1 FB-1 FB-2 FACE BRICK -- MATCH EXIST MATCH EXIST ALCOA / REYNOBOND -- CHAMPAGNE (MATCH EXIST) PAC CLAD -- -- MATCH EXIST KAWNEER MATCH EXIST MATCH EXIST THERMALLY BROKEN BELDEN MATCH EXIST MARYSVILLE UTILITY BRICK (U.N.O.) SEE ELEV'S FOR MODULAR LOCATIONS CONTACT GREG SEABURG @ METROBRICK BELDEN MATCH EXIST CONCORD CLEAR --MATCH EXIST MODULAR CONTACT GREG SEABURG @ METROBRICK Issues and Revisions: Commission No: Drawn by: Checked by: SHEET 1295 BANDANA BLVD N, SUITE 200 ST. PAUL, MN 55108-2735 (651) 642-9200 | FAX (651) 642-1101 www.popearch.com POPE ARCHITECTS, INC. 0"1/2"1" TRUE SHEET SCALE CENTRA CARE HEALTH REMODEL 1013 Hart Boulevard, Monticello, MN 55362 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION4/21/2017 10:58:00 AM C:\Revit Projects\16015c_CentraCareMonticello_ED-Imaging breakout_R16_CENTRAL_czechstone@yahoo.com.rvt A3.0 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS AND PERSPECTIVES DM MB 12571-17049 1/8" = 1'-0"A3.0 1 SOUTH ELEVATION (CANOPY) 1/8" = 1'-0"A3.0 2 AMBULANCE GARAGE EAST ELEVATION - PHASE TWO 1/8" = 1'-0"A3.0 3 AMBULANCE GARAGE WEST ELEVATION - PHASE TWO A3.0 4 FRONT PERSPECTIVE - VIEW 1 A3.0 5 FRONT PERSPECTIVE - VIEW 2 CITY SUBMITTAL 4/24/2017 3701 12th Street North, Suite 206 St. Cloud, MN 56303 Phone 320-253-9495 Fax 320-253-8737 Toll Free 1-800-270-9495 3701 12th Street North, Suite 206 St. Cloud, MN 56303 Phone 320-253-9495 Fax 320-253-8737 Toll Free 1-800-270-9495 ∅ ∅ 3701 12th Street North, Suite 206 St. Cloud, MN 56303 Phone 320-253-9495 Fax 320-253-8737 Toll Free 1-800-270-9495 3701 12th Street North, Suite 206 St. Cloud, MN 56303 Phone 320-253-9495 Fax 320-253-8737 Toll Free 1-800-270-9495 3701 12th Street North, Suite 206 St. Cloud, MN 56303 Phone 320-253-9495 Fax 320-253-8737 Toll Free 1-800-270-9495 3701 12th Street North, Suite 206 St. Cloud, MN 56303 Phone 320-253-9495 Fax 320-253-8737 Toll Free 1-800-270-9495 3701 12th Street North, Suite 206 St. Cloud, MN 56303 Phone 320-253-9495 Fax 320-253-8737 Toll Free 1-800-270-9495 3701 12th Street North, Suite 206 St. Cloud, MN 56303 Phone 320-253-9495 Fax 320-253-8737 Toll Free 1-800-270-9495 Phone (320) 253-9495 3701 12th Street North, Suite 206 Fax (320) 358-2001 St. Cloud, MN 56303 Toll Free (800) 270-9495 Luminaire Schedule Symbol Qty Label LLF Description 8 D - Portfolio - 6LB 0.850 LD6B30D010 EU6B30508040 6LBMH1 9 W1 - GPC - T3 - 1A - 0.850 GPC-AF-01-LED-E1-T3 3 xAA - GSM - 250W - 3 0.850 GSM-XX-250-MP-XX-3S-FG-XX-X 5 W2 - STILO - ASSYMET 0.850 1E2884_101_1xLED-NW-42W_- W W W W W W W W xAA xAA W D D D D D D DD W2 W2 W2 W2 xAA W2 5 . 3 5.6 7 . 2 7.8 8 . 0 8.4 8 . 1 8.4 8 . 5 8.7 1 0 . 0 10.0 1 8 . 1 17.3 4 5 . 3 40.9 4 5 . 7 39.5 5 0 . 4 44.6 2 6 . 5 24.6 9.5 9.2 10.1 10.2 8.7 8.7 7.5 7.5 7.6 7.6 9.1 9.1 17.8 17.0 44.5 40.5 44.6 39.1 49.5 44.4 26.3 24.7 5.2 5.7 7.0 7.8 7.3 7.6 7.1 7.3 7.3 7.4 8.9 8.9 17.5 16.8 43.9 40.0 43.2 37.9 48.5 43.4 26.2 24.3 2.4 2 .9 3.2 3 .8 3.6 4 .1 3.8 4 .3 4.5 4 .8 6.4 6 .7 15.4 14.8 42.7 38.9 43.3 37.7 48.4 43.0 24.8 23.1 3 . 0 2 . 8 3 . 8 3 . 8 4 . 4 4 . 3 4 . 7 4 . 5 4 . 9 5 . 1 6 . 2 6 . 0 1 1 . 2 1 0 . 9 4 3 . 8 3 9 . 3 8 0 . 0 8 0 . 3 6 8 . 4 1 7 . 9 1 6 . 9 1 0 5 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.1 0.8 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.7 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.0 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.6 1.1 1.2 1.5 1.8 1.1 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.9 1.0 1.5 1.7 1.0 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.6 1.1 1.2 1.2 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.9 1.0 0.9 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 1.9 1.6 1.1 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.5 1.1 1.8 1.4 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.9 1.8 0.9 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.5 1.1 1.1 1.7 1.4 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.7 0.9 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.9 0.6 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.6 1.0 1.7 0.2 0.3 0.4 1.0 1.3 1.3 1.6 1.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.8 1.3 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.6 1.5 0.3 0.7 1.0 1.0 0.3 0.7 1.1 1.2 0.3 0.7 1.2 1.8 0.3 0.9 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 2.2 2.5 3.2 4.5 2.9 2.1 4.5 3.9 2.0 2.4 4.8 3.2 2.1 2.9 3.7 4.1 3.3 2.6 3.7 3.3 2.3 2.0 2.1 2.3 2.9 2.1 4.4 2.6 2.2 3.0 2.1 2.1 2.9 2.6 2.3 2.7 2.1 3.6 3.9 4.9 3.7 2.1 3.4 4.5 2.4 2.6 3.5 3.3 3.4 3.2 5.0 7.1 8.4 5.2 8.1 9.8 8.0 5.1 5.1 7.5 12.0 7.7 5.7 5.3 6.9 7.2 7.7 6.8 7.2 11.6 7.6 13.6 14.4 6.4 5.1 17.8 15.0 6.6 6.8 10.0 20.6 20.2 5.4 13.4 14.3 10.5 15.1 5.7 12.7 13.9 5.6 5.6 6.0 6.5 7.6 9.1 8.8 7.1 6.5 11.1 8.3 5.6 7.4 6.0 19.4 21.2 11.2 8.8 18.7 18.6 10.1 14.9 18.9 13.0 11.8 PROJECT CONSULTANTS CERTIFICATION REVISIONS SHEET TITLE THIS SHEET MAY BE A REDUCED COPY. THE BAR ABOVE IS 1" LONG ON A FULL SIZE SHEET. DRAWING SCALES APPLY TO FULL SIZE SHEETS. Date: Drawn: Checked: Sheet Number: Project Number: COPYRIGHT © 2014 DUNHAM ASSOCIATES, INC. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. E1 SITE PLAN PHOTOMETRICS WE CT 04/24/17 12571-16015 CENTRACARE HEALTH MONTICELLO ED REMODEL 1013 HART BLVD MONTICELLO, MN 55362 1/16" = 1'-0" 1 SITE PLAN PHOTOMETRICS Signature Name Date Registration Number WILLIAM E. EVANS 04/24/17 42386 No. Date Description 3701 12th Street North, Suite 206 St. Cloud, MN 56303 Phone 320-253-9495 Fax 320-253-8737 Toll Free 1-800-270-9495 x x x x x Building a legacy – your legacy. 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763-541-4800 Fax: 763-541-1700 Equal Opportunity Employer wsbeng.com K:\010150-000\Admin\Docs\LTR-a-schumann-Centracare 053117.docx May 31, 2017 Ms. Angela Schumann Community Development Director City of Monticello 505 Walnut Street, Suite 1 Monticello, MN 55362 Re: Centracare Health Monticello Site Plan Review City Project No. 2017-015 WSB Project No. 010150 Dear Ms. Schumann: We have reviewed the civil plans, dated April 24, 2017, as prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. and offer the following comments. Utility Plan 1. Show the existing applicable drainage and utility easements over any public sanitary sewer and watermain within the project limits. 2. A utility excavation permit must be obtained from the Public Works department prior to commencement of utility connections. Coordinate with the City utility superintendent for any further requirements. 3. Provide an as-built utility plan once construction is complete. Details 4. Detail plates shall be updated per the City’s April 2017 General Specifications and Standard Detail Plates for Street and Utility Construction located on the City’s website- Engineering department. Stormwater Management 5. The proposed site improvement does not create 1 acre or more of new impervious surface, thus volume reduction is not required. May 31, 2017 Page 2 K:\010150-000\Admin\Docs\LTR-a-schumann-Centracare 053117.docx 6. If 1 acre or more of the site is being disturbed, a NPDES/SDS Construction Storm Water General Permit and SWPPP shall be provided prior to construction commencing. Please confirm the site disturbance area. Please have the applicant provide a written response addressing the comments above. Please give me a call at 763-271-3236 if you have any questions or comments regarding this letter. Thank you. Sincerely, WSB & Associates, Inc. Shibani K. Bisson, PE City Engineer cc: Steve Grittman, NAC skb CentraCare Health — M o ceAw. quest Tor Hmenament to k -on Development and Final Stage PUD ional use Permitfor • Amendment to Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development for construction expansion on existing hospital campus • Phase is Entrance canopy • Phase 2: MRI unit Relocation of ambulance garage • Improvements proposed to south (Broadway) side of property on existing developed area • Development and Final Stage application • Council will act on the final Stage PUD Guided "Places for Community" Zoned B-2, overlays in place Medical/Clinic uses permitted in the B-2 District Conditional Use Permit for PUD Full hospital site is approximately 14 acres, improvement area is less than 1 acre r Nt Ae IS ;I � •11 1 I 1�.i1�' • 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 for the proposed use. • PUD - Superior development than that which would result from strict application of zoning standards Phasing • First Phase — Mid November 2017 • Reconfiguration of entrance drive area and construction of exterior entrance canopy along the existing building front (replacing existing) • Internal building improvements to coordinate with the external changes • Second Phase — anticipated no later than spring 2o18 • 1,765 sf ambulance garagge; located in an existing vacant surfaced area east of the main hospitaTentrance (reconfiguration near current) 1,348 sf MRI facility proposed to be located between the main hospital and office building. That area is currently hard -surfaced and vacant Internal building improvements Parking and Access No change is proposed to the main entrance from Broadway into the site • Loss of two stalls from the total number of parking stalls with the reconfiguration; required to maintain ADA compliance • Sidewalk and crossing improvements to the front entrance area from established parking lots Utilities! Grading and Drainage Compliance with City Engineer's letter; hydrant relocation Trash Handling Current internal trash handling process is not impacted by the current proposal. Landscaping • Relocation or addition of plantings into the parking lot islands to meet the landscaping requirements Lighting • Photometric compliant • Provide specification detail for building lighting and pole height Signage • New signage proposed along the canopy and the face of the existing hospita-I • Provide conceptual sign plan prior to Council consideration of final stage PUD Building Design Mix of brick and architectural metal consistent with ordinance standards and required to be consistent with existing building material colors • Detail materials treatment for the visible portion of the MRI building facing east • Insulated aluminum doors buffered by island delineator plantings, and existing boulevard plantings E- 1 71-, TTE T E -1 I. TFi --E L= m SEE 'AmCH TBm� L F LAM Tr 1, L 1'7. L --.I, TIP-! IIIIII % r Ir :. 'r:;.. . 02c,7 wwd—d I.mh..Idmrd Inc Cul.!*.Hui. bft— — dp;m; III Plant ScIbedule ■ Z:O::E OT -r. ZOOWDHjROT-Mr.s MWE SIZE 131AClho 0C. QL 3 n n -fo" 1,r LMLV4 TLA -IT- 'L-WzM�Z' 2 Ar, I. H. I, Lr. vA-LEE ':RARA-FLE f WAD.- - 1 .5- BB Ih5 Uom FRONT PERSPECTIVE -VIEW 2 gu '� AMS,!L NCE GARAGE WEST ELEVATION - PHASE TWO ,u o FRONT PERSPECTIVE-','I='.^r 1 AMBULANCE GARAGE EAST ELEVATION -PHASE TWO %i-� SOUTH ELEVATION (CANOPY) Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit for amendment to Planned Unit Development, subject to conditions in Exhibit Z: • Verify materials for exposed wall on east side of the MRI facility. Materials shall be consistent and compatible with the other materials proposed. Revise landscaping plan to meet requirements for island delineator plantings. • Applicant shall provide a conceptual wall and free- standing signage plan prior to final stage review by the City Council. • Applicant shall provide a certificate of survey for building permit submittal. Provide specification detail for lighting fixtures to demonstrate compliance with Chapter 4, Section 4 of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance. • Applicant shall enter into an amendment to development agreement as may be required for the proposed amendment. Comments of other City Staff, including those within the City Engineer's letter dated May 31, 2017. Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/2017 1 2C.Public Hearing –Consideration of request for Amendment to Mills Fleet Farm Planned Unit Development for proposed changes to signage.Applicant: Ramerth, Tim - Widseth Smith Nolting.(NAC) Property:Legal:Lot 1 and 2, Block 1, and Lot 2, Block 1, Mills Fleet Farm Addition Address: NA Planning Case Number:2017 - 018 A.REFERENCE & BACKGROUND: Request(s):Application to revise and/or increase the approved signage on the main pylon from 199 square feet to 286 square feet, and wall signage by changing a wall sign on the principal building and adding an electronic digital message board, and the addition of two “Kerosene” signs on a canopy Deadline for Decision:July 10th, 2017 Land Use Designation:Places to Shop Zoning Designation:Mills Fleet Farm PUD District The purpose of the PUD, Planned Unit Development 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 process that results in a development outcome exceeding that which is typically achievable through the 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. Overlays/Environmental Regulations Applicable:Freeway Bonus Sign District Current Site Use:Retail Commercial (Under construction) Surrounding Land Uses: North:Interstate 94 Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/2017 2 East:Industrial south of Chelsea Vacant Commercial north of Chelsea South:Industrial West:Industrial Project Description:The applicants received approval of a Planned Unit Development for platting and construction on the property in 2016. The approvals included construction of the principal building on Lot 1, Block 1, construction of the motor fuel station on Lot 2, Block 1, and construction of the main pylon sign on Lot 1, Block 2, north of Chelsea Road. The applicant is seeking an amendment to the PUD in order to accommodate changes to the signage on each of the three construction approvals. One of the wall signs on the principal building would be converted to a digital message display, a product sign would be added to the monument on the motor fuel station property, and the size of the sign display on the main pylon would be increased from what was originally approved, as noted above. ANALYSIS When considering Planned Unit Development applications, the City’s zoning ordinance is modified to accommodate flexibility from the typically applicable regulations to a design that is considered to meet the intentions of the Comprehensive Plan, but which varies from the strict zoning regulations. In this case, the applicant is seeking to modify approved signage applicable to the PUD, based on a review of the project as it nears completion. As noted previously, the applicants propose to increase the sign area of the main pylon from 199 square feet originally approved, to 286 square feet. The bulk of the increase would be to the center portion of the sign identifying the motor fuel station and gas price signage. Adding the previously approved space for up to two tenant identification signs on the main pylon (the plat reserves an outlot south of Chelsea, and area north of Chelsea) for future development), results in the proposed total of 286 square feet. The bulk of the signage on the property is not changing, and has been separately permitted. When the original sign plan was reviewed, the City identified the proposed sign to the Union Crossings sign north of I-94 as a comparable situation. That sign is Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/2017 3 approximately 400 square feet in area, and identifies a number of shopping center tenants, in lieu of several individual pylon signs throughout the project. The Union Crossings sign is 50 feet in height, the same as the approved Mills Fleet Farm pylon sign. Under the City’s sign ordinance, the total allowable square footage of the main pylon and the motor fuel station monument sign would be 300 square feet (200 square feet for the pylon, and 100 square feet for the monument). The proposed signs total approximately 465 square feet. However, it is noted that the proposed pylon also includes space for the future tenants of the PUD, eliminating the possibility of separate pylon signage for those two other users (they may request monument signs under the City’s sign regulations with a subsequent amendment to the PUD). As such, the proposed freestanding signage in the PUD would be consistent with the intent of the City’s sign regulations, and consistent as well with the Union Crossings signage system. With regard to the proposed amendment to wall signs, the original PUD approvals indicated that the wall sign area was approximately 6% of the wall facing Chelsea Road, where the code allows as much as 15% of that silhouette space for signage. The addition of the “Auto Service Center” sign and digital display, does not measurably impact the allowable wall percentage. Staff included the changes in this PUD request since the static sign and digital display on the main store wall were not anticipated under the original approval. It is noted that the PUD now includes three digital display boards: the gas copy electronic signage on the pylon as proposed with this amendment; the electronic message board on the monument sign (as originally proposed and approved); and the electronic message board as proposed with this amendment, to be located on the main store wall. The applicant also proposes adding two signs on a canopy to identify a kerosene island. The signs are proposed to be illuminated and are 49 square feet each. The addition of these signs would still keep the total wall signage well below the allowable sign percentage. B.ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1.Motion to adopt Resolution No. PC-2017- 010, recommending approval of the amendment to the Mills Fleet Farm PUD ordinance for sign allowances, per the submitted plans, based on the findings in said resolution, and incorporating the conditions of Exhibit Z of the staff report. 2.Motion to deny adoption of Resolution No. PC-2017-010, for approval of the amendment to the Mills Fleet Farm PUD ordinance for sign allowances, based on findings as stated at the public hearing. Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/2017 4 3.Motion to table action on the Resolution, subject to additional information. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the resolution approving the changes. As noted in the report, the changes are consistent with the intent of the PUD, and with the comparable situation as applied to the Union Crossings development. With the conditions limiting further pylon sign construction in the PUD, the result should improve traffic visibility and minimize driver confusion in the Chelsea Road corridor. Staff will prepare an ordinance amendment for the Mills Fleet Farm PUD should the proposal be recommended for approval to the City Council. D. SUPPORTING DATA A.Resolution PC-2017-010 B.Aerial Site Image C.Applicant Narrative D.Site Plan E.Exterior Building Elevation (wall signage amendment) F.Proposed Pylon (amendment) G.Proposed Pylon, Colored Elevation (amendment) H.Proposed Wall Signage (amendment) I.Proposed Canopy Signage (amendment) J.Proposed Monument (as originally approved, not proposed for amendment) K.Sign Tabulation Z. Conditions of Approval Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/2017 5 EXHIBIT Z Amendment to Planned Unit Development Mills Fleet Farm Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, and Lot 1, Block 2, Mills Fleet Farm Addition 1.Additional freestanding signs proposed for Outlot A and for Lot 1, Block 2 shall be of monument style only, consistent with the requirements of the sign regulations of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance and subject to an amendment to PUD at the time of development. 2.The applicant shall verify that the proposed signage is permissible per MnDOT and/or FWHA requirements based on the current plat and right of way configuration. 3.Comments of other City Staff and Planning Commission. CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-010 1 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR MILLS FLEET FARM ADDITION TO MONTICELLO WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted a request to Planned Unit Development property along Chelsea Road, including Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, and Lot 1, Block 2; and WHEREAS, the applicant is currently developing the property for a variety of retail purposes; and WHEREAS, the site is guided for commercial uses under the label “Places to Shop” in the City’s Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the proposed PUD, along with the companion Plat, were found, as a part of the original PUD approval in 2016, to be consistent with the long-term use and development of the property for commercial uses; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 6, 2017 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 PUD amendment provides an appropriate means of furthering the intent of the Comprehensive Plan for the site. 2. The proposed signage is consistent with the direction of the Comprehensive Plan for shopping center retail development. 3. The improvements proposed for the site under the amended PUD are consistent with the intent of the zoning ordinance and with similar development in the City. 4. The improvements will not have impacts on public services, including sewer, water, stormwater treatment, and traffic which have been planned to serve the property for the development as proposed. 5. The PUD flexibility for the project for signage, is consistent with the intent of the City’s economic development objectives, as well as with the intent of the PUD zoning regulations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota, that the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-010 2 Monticello City Council approves the amendment to the PUD, subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit Z as follows: 1. Additional freestanding signs to be proposed for Outlot A and for Lot 1, Block 2 shall be of monument style only, consistent with the requirements of the sign regulations of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance and subject to an amendment to PUD at the time of development. 2. The applicant shall verify that the proposed signage is permissible per MnDOT and/or FWHA requirements based on the current plat and right of way configuration. 3. Comments of other City Staff and Planning Commission. ADOPTED this 6th day of June, 2017, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota. MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION By: _______________________________ Brad Fyle, Chair ATTEST: ____________________________________________ Angela Schumann, Community Development Director R a merth , Tim, WSN - R equ est for Amendmen t to PUD Lt 1 & Lt 2, Blk 1, Lt 1, Blk 2, and Outlot A Mills Fleet Farm Addn to M onti | 310 & 320 Chelsea Rd C reated by : C ity of Monticello 570 ft May 8, 2017 City of Monticello Attn: Angela Schumann Community Development Director 505 Walnut Street, Suite 1 Monticello, MN 55362 Re: Mills Fleet Farm PUD Amendment – Ordinance No. 650 Dear Ms. Schumann, On behalf of Mills Fleet Farm (MFF), we are making a submission in request of an amendment to the PUD for Mills Fleet Farm Addition to Monticello (Ordinance No. 650). The PUD will remain the same, the only change requested is signage associated with the multi-tenant pylon sign adjacent to I-94. The plans and specifications approved for the original PUD are on file at the City of Monticello, which are the current plans and specifications governing the construction that is underway. We have included the plan sheets that we are requesting a change to the approved PUD. Following is our PUD amendment request: PUD Flexibility Mills Fleet Farm Addition to Monticello is a Planned Unit Development (PUD) for a multi-lot commercial shopping center that was approved by the City of Monticello on July 25, 2016. The intent was to consolidate signage within this PUD to minimize the number of freestanding signs that would be permitted. Under current ordinance, one freestanding sign would be allowed for each lot and this development falls within the Freeway Bonus District. The PUD was planned to utilize a single sign. The ordinance recognizes that special allowances are needed along the I-94 corridor for effective communication to interstate travelers. We are requesting the fuel pricing sign be increased from 52 square feet to 139 square feet per side. An analysis was completed and it was determined that a 36”-48” character height is needed to be viewable from I-94. This is dictated by the speed of traffic and the distance the sign is setback from the interstate. This sign is an additional 85 feet farther back from the interstate than the neighboring properties, as a utility easement has been provided adjacent to the I-94 ROW line on the front portion of this property. The approved fuel pricing sign has a 24” character height, which is not adequate. 1. Mills has elected to change the character height of the fuel pricing to 36”. This requires an increase of 87 square feet per side for the proposed pylon sign, which amounts to a total sign coverage of 286 square feet per side for the pylon sign, whereas the approved PUD has a total of 199 square feet of signage per side. 2. The PUD is a shopping center that is greater than 150,000 square feet and uses more than 20 acres for the site. Under the district regulations, the ordinance states that two pylon signs may be allowed if this criterion is met. The PUD utilizes a pylon sign and a monument sign. The pylon sign may have up to 300 square feet per side and be 32 feet in height and the monument sign can be 14 feet in height and have up to 100 square feet per side. The approved PUD consists of a pylon sign with a height of 50 feet and 199 square feet of sign area per side and a monument sign with a 15’ 3” height and a sign area of 171 square feet per side. A total square footage allowed under ordinance for the two signs would be 800 square feet. What was approved was 742 square feet. What is now proposed is 914 square feet. The pylon sign structure will remain the same as approved in the PUD, the only change will be to the area that will be covered by signage on the pylon sign. 3. Under current ordinance, 3 additional freestanding signs could be allowed for a conventional lot and block subdivision, which would add another 1,200 square feet of signage in this location. A PUD was planned in lieu of a standard lot and block subdivision, which now restricts multi-tenant signage to the two signs approved in the PUD. 4. The signage on the buildings is substantially less than what is allowed by ordinance. Ordinance would allow up to 4,060 square feet (15% of wall area) of signage on the buildings, whereas we are only utilizing 1,037 square feet (4% of wall area). 5. A message board was considered for the pylon sign, but this alternative was rejected. Due to interstate speeds and setback from I-94, the appropriate character height would only allow 2 lines of text with 9 characters in each row. It was not feasible to provide a message board of this size. The PUD utilizes flexibility, which remains consistent with the current request for increasing the fuel pricing sign size. This request is dictated by readability of the fuel pricing sign from I -94. The PUD maintains signage that is substantially less that is allowed by ordinance and is consistent with the City’s development objectives, comprehensive plan and rezoning approvals. We request to bring this PUD amendment to the next planning commission meeting scheduled for June 6, 2017. You may contact me at (218) 316-3653 or by email, tim.ramerth@wsn.us.com or Mike Angland at (218) 316-3608 or by email, mike.angland@wsn.us.com should you have any questions or need any additional information. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, WIDSETH, SMITH & NOLTING ASSOCIATES, INC. Timothy T. Ramerth, P.E. Project Manager cc. Hugh Leasum, Mills Properties LLC Chris Dolan, Fredrickson & Byron, PA Mike Angland, WSN Attch. Sheet A50.1 Signage SHEET C3.3SHEET C3.2SHEET C3.1UGEUGEUGESTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSSTSTGASGASUGEUGEUGEUGEUGEUGEGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASUGEUGEUGE3C 4ASANIT A R Y S E W E R WATE R S E R V I C E TRANS-FORMERCT CAB.7AIRRIG A T I O N ELECTRICALTRANSFORMER13ABCDE2MILLS FLEET FARM165,296 S.F.CAR WASH4,905 S.F.ACCESSORY BUILDING17,583 S.F.COCOHYDH YDH YDHYD H YDHYDH YDWWW W WW WWWWWW WWHY DW H YDWWCOCOCOCOWCODT DTDT DT DTDTDTDTDT© 2017 WIDSETH SMITH NOLTINGJ:\0115B-MILLS\0115B0070-Monticello\0115B0070.000-New Store\CADD\CIVIL\C03-SP-0115B0070.dwg Plotted by:Mike Rude 1/27/2017 1:37:39 PM SHEET NO.JOB NUMBER:CHECKED BY:DATE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:DATEWIDSETH SMITH NOLTINGEngineering | Architecture | Surveying | EnvironmentalREVISIONS DESCRIPTIONREV#BYLIC. NO.DATE:MILLS FLEET FARMMILLS PROPERTIES, LLCMONTICELLO, MINNESOTASITE PLAN SHEET INDEXC3.0JULY 29, 2016AS SHOWNMERMER0115B0070.000I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORTWAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION ANDTHAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDERTHE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.MICHAEL E. RUDE07/29/20164389610/7/16RFP #1MER1/27/17SI #2MERCONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS 07/29/20160 SCALE ( IN FEET ) 80 160 NORTHCHELSEA ROADOUTLOT A LOT 1 BLOCK 2 12 GA S UG E UG E UGE UG E UG E UG E U G E ST ST ST ST ST ST GASGASGA S GA S GA S UG E UG E UG E UG E UG E UG E UG E UG E UG E UG E UG E UG E U G EGASGASGA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S UG E UG E UGE UG E U G E 3C4ASANITARY SEWERWATER SERVICETRA N S - FOR M E R CT C A B .IRRIGATIONELE C T R I C A L TRA N S F O R M E R 1 3 A B 2 CAR WASH 4,905 S.F.COCO DTDTDT DT DTDTDT DT DT © 2017 WIDSETH SMITH NOLTINGJ:\0115B-MILLS\0115B0070-Monticello\0115B0070.000-New Store\CADD\CIVIL\C03-SP-0115B0070.dwg Plotted by:Mike Rude 1/27/2017 1:37:42 PM SHEET NO.JOB NUMBER:CHECKED BY:DATE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:DATEWIDSETH SMITH NOLTINGEngineering | Architecture | Surveying | EnvironmentalREVISIONS DESCRIPTIONREV#BYLIC. NO.DATE:MILLS FLEET FARMMILLS PROPERTIES, LLCMONTICELLO, MINNESOTASITE PLAN - NORTHC3.1JULY 29, 2016AS SHOWNMERMER0115B0070.000I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORTWAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION ANDTHAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDERTHE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.MICHAEL E. RUDE07/29/20164389609-26-16RFP #1TAP1/27/17SI #2MERCONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS 07/29/20160 SCALE ( IN FEET ) 40 80NORTHVACUUM ISLAND (SEE VACUUM ISLAND DETAIL) PYLON SIGN (SEE SHEET A50.1 & S50.1) NOTES: 1.ALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2.ALL CURB RADII ARE 5' TO FACE OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 3.ALL CURB TO MEET MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SPECIFICATIONS FOR A TYPE “B618 CURB & GUTTER” OR "S518 CURB & GUTTER". 4.CONSTRUCT PEDESTRIAN RAMPS IN ACCORDANCE WITH MNDOT STANDARD PLAN 5-297.250 5.00'31. 6 2 ' CH E L S E A R O A D LEGEND: B618 CURB & GUTTER S518 CURB & GUTTER 30' R 30' R 30' R SEE CHELSEA ROAD TURN LANE PLAN SHEET FOR DIMENSION DETAILS MONUMENT SIGN (SEE SHEET A50.1 & S50.1) 34. 6 8 '33.98'IRRIGATION SLEEVE (TYP.)LIGHT POLE (TYP.) DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT PROPERTY BOUNDARY (TYP.)DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT (TYP.) DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT (TYP.) PROPOSED SIDEWALK EASMENT 12.00'PROPOSED TRAIL EASEMENT12.00'6.00'36.70'67.75'271.49' PEDESTRIAN RAMP SEE NOTE 4 PEDESTRIAN RAMP SEE NOTE 4 PEDESTRIAN RAMP SEE NOTE 4 40. 0 0 ' 10' 6" CLASS 5 DRIVE 15. 6 2 ' 25' R 16' R (TYP.)12 ST ST S ST GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S GA S UGEUGE252523232323172323232524242525252457A A B C D E 232324244 7 7 S T A L L S 8 9 S T A L L S 201726265 S T A L L S 17 STALLSCO HYD HYDHYDHYDHY D HYDW WWWWWWWWHYDW WCOCODTDT DT DT DT DT DTDTDT DT DT © 2017 WIDSETH SMITH NOLTINGJ:\0115B-MILLS\0115B0070-Monticello\0115B0070.000-New Store\CADD\CIVIL\C03-SP-0115B0070.dwg Plotted by:Mike Rude 1/27/2017 1:37:44 PM SHEET NO.JOB NUMBER:CHECKED BY:DATE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:DATEWIDSETH SMITH NOLTINGEngineering | Architecture | Surveying | EnvironmentalREVISIONS DESCRIPTIONREV#BYLIC. NO.DATE:MILLS FLEET FARMMILLS PROPERTIES, LLCMONTICELLO, MINNESOTASITE PLAN - CENTERC3.2JULY 29, 2016AS SHOWNMERMER0115B0070.000I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORTWAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION ANDTHAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDERTHE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.MICHAEL E. RUDE07/29/2016438968/12/16ADDENDUM 1EAB10/24/16RFP #1MER1/27/17SI #2MERCONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS 07/29/20160 SCALE ( IN FEET ) 40 80NORTH SEASONAL DISPLAY AREA (GARDEN CENTER) OUTDOOR MERCHANDISE AND TRAILER DISPLAY AREA FLAGPOLE (SEE FLAGPOLE BASE SECTION AND PLAN DETAIL)OUTDOOR MERCHANDISE AND TRAILER DISPLAY AREA MILLS FLEET FARM 165,296 S.F. DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE (SEE DUMPSTER PAD & DUMPSTER GATE DETAILS) KEROSENE ISLAND (SEE KEROSENE CANOPY SECTIONS, DETAILS AND PHOTOS) NOTES: 1.ALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2.ALL CURB RADII ARE 5' TO FACE OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 3.ALL CURB TO MEET MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SPECIFICATIONS FOR A TYPE “B618 CURB & GUTTER” OR "S518 CURB & GUTTER". 4.CONSTRUCT PEDESTRIAN RAMPS IN ACCORDANCE WITH MNDOT STANDARD PLAN 5-297.250 LEGEND: B618 CURB & GUTTER S518 CURB & GUTTER TANK FARM PEDESTRIAN RAMP WITH TRUNCATED DOMES SEE NOTE 4 30' R 10' R 20' R 30' R 20' R 20' R 30' R 15' R 15' R 15' R 15' R 10' R 10' R 30' R 30' R 10' R 10' R 10' R 34' R MOTORCYCLE PAD SEE PAVING PLAN 48 SQ. FT. TRUNCATED DOMES (SEE NOTE 4) CENTER WITH BUILDING ENTRY 24.00'12.00' 24 SQ. FT. TRUNCATED DOMES (SEE NOTE 4) CENTER WITH BUILDING ENTRY 24.00' F-F 30.00'F-F24.00' (TYP.) 30. 0 0 ' F-F30.00'F-F50. 0 0 ' 50. 0 0 ' 24.00' F-F 42. 0 0 ' F-F 24.00'30.00'F-F20.00'20.00'14.00'10.00'30.00'20.00'40.00' F-F GALVANIZED CHAIN LINK FENCE DECORATIVE WROUGHT IRON FENCE PROPERTY BOUNDARY PROPERTY BOUNDARY 20.50' EDGE OF BITUMINOUS 112.83' BACK OF CURB 108.29' BACK OF CURB 30.00'F-F18.72' 147.97'200' TO FAR END30.00'125.00' 22.00' BACK OF CURB 30' R 5' VALLEY GUTTER SEE DETAIL 5' VALLEY GUTTER SEE DETAIL IRRIGATION SLEEVE (TYP.) 20.00' UTILITY EASEMENT (TYP.) DECORATIVE WROUGHT IRON FENCE LIGHT POLE (TYP.) LIGHT POLE (TYP.) 20.00' TYP.10.00' TYP.40.00' TYP.10.00' TYP.40.00' TYP.15.00' TYP.DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT (TYP.)6.00'PROPOSED SIDEWALK EASEMENT 243.10' PEDESTRIAN RAMP SEE NOTE 4 PEDESTRIAN RAMP SEE NOTE 4 PEDESTRIAN RAMP SEE NOTE 4 ENTRANCE GATE HUT AND DECORATIVE GATE SEE: ARCHITECTURAL PLAN SHEETS 11 1 1 1 1 23 ST MILLS FLEET FARM 165,296 S.F. ACCESSORY BUILDING 17,583 S.F.HYD HY DWWW WWW H YDWCOCOCO W© 2017 WIDSETH SMITH NOLTINGJ:\0115B-MILLS\0115B0070-Monticello\0115B0070.000-New Store\CADD\CIVIL\C03-SP-0115B0070.dwg Plotted by:Mike Rude 1/27/2017 1:37:47 PM SHEET NO.JOB NUMBER:CHECKED BY:DATE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:DATEWIDSETH SMITH NOLTINGEngineering | Architecture | Surveying | EnvironmentalREVISIONS DESCRIPTIONREV#BYLIC. NO.DATE:MILLS FLEET FARMMILLS PROPERTIES, LLCMONTICELLO, MINNESOTASITE PLAN - SOUTHC3.3JULY 29, 2016AS SHOWNMERMER0115B0070.000I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORTWAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION ANDTHAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDERTHE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.MICHAEL E. RUDE07/29/20164389609-26-16RFP #1MER1/27/17SI #2MERCONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS 07/29/20160 SCALE ( IN FEET ) 40 80NORTHNOTES: 1.ALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO BACK OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2.ALL CURB RADII ARE 5' TO BACK OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 3.ALL CURB TO MEET MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SPECIFICATIONS FOR A TYPE “B618 CURB & GUTTER” OR "S518 CURB & GUTTER". 4.CONSTRUCT PEDESTRIAN RAMPS IN ACCORDANCE WITH MNDOT STANDARD PLAN 5-297.250 LEGEND: B618 CURB & GUTTER S518 CURB & GUTTER DECORATIVE WROUGHT IRON FENCE WITH 16' GATE 16.00' GENERATOR & TRANSFORMER PAD (SEE GENERATOR PAD SECTION DETAIL ) 210.00' 94.00'77.85'20.00'9.00'81.79' PROPERTY BOUNDARY EXISTING DRAINAGE EASEMENT PROPERTY BOUNDARY 285.16' EDGE OF BITUMINOUS125.00'200' TO FAR END147.97'18.81' 1.50'1.50'48.50'49.50'20.50' EDGE OF BITUMINOUS 147.44' EDGE OF BITUMINOUSUTILITY EASEMENT (TYP.)1A13.112.00'478.00' GALVANIZED CHAIN LINK FENCE GALVANIZED CHAIN LINK FENCE LIGHT POLE (TYP.) 176.11' EDGE OF BITUMINOUS DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT (TYP.)348.89'20.00'TO SOUTHEASTBUILDING CORNER189.33'52.53' 313.83' DRAINAGE EASEMENT PROPOSED CONCRETE SPILLWAY SEE DETAIL 12 FINISH FLOOR 100' - 0" 1-T.O. PRECAST 126' - 2 1/2" 2-T.O. PRECAST 130' - 8"3-T.O. PRECAST 133' - 8" 1 2 11 12 T.O. SILO 167' - 8" 3.7 7.91.5 A6.1 5 A6.1 7 H D P T K H L P T 16" HIGH ADDRESS SIGN DJ 16' - 0"16' - 0" 7' - 0" 22' - 6"33' - 6" 6' - 6" 16' - 6"14' - 0"9' - 6"86' - 0"44' - 0"34' - 6"6' - 6" 7' - 6" 32' - 6"9' - 6"34' - 0"22' - 0"18' - 0"24' - 0"16' - 0" 476' - 0" N H TYP. OF 6 8' - 0"13' - 2"8' - 0" A6.1 8 SIM. B1B2B1B2 2-T.O. PRECAST 130'-8" T.O. PRECAST 133' - 8" 10 A6.1 TYP.12' - 5"5' - 0"9' - 0" B1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 B2 B1 B2 B1 B1MEQL 15" HIGH LETTERS 29" HIGH READER BOARD FINISH FLOOR 100' - 0" 1-T.O. PRECAST 126' - 2 1/2" 121112 T.O. SILO 167' - 8" A6.1 6 B1 B2 M F G F GF J D R B1 C H 476' - 0" N 4' - 0"9' - 0"3' - 4" RETAINING WALL F FIRE PUMP TEST HEAD 345678910 FINISH FLOOR 100' - 0" 1-T.O. PRECAST 126' - 2 1/2" 2-T.O. PRECAST 130' - 8" 3-T.O. PRECAST 133' - 8" B C E F G H JA T.O. SILO 167' - 8" B.1A.2 A.7 M N L B2 FG B1 H J D H 21' - 10"24' - 0"9' - 0" R 356' - 0" A6.1 8 TYP. A 7' - 5"4' - 0"6' - 1 1/2"A D FINISH FLOOR 100' - 0" 1-T.O. PRECAST 126' - 2 1/2" 2-T.O. PRECAST 130' - 8" 3-T.O. PRECAST 133' - 8" BCEFGHJ A T.O. SILO 167' - 8" B.1 A.2A.7 9' - 0"24' - 0" 356' - 0" 12' - 0" EB1B2GF B1 K L N M R J D A T.O. SMOOTH FINISH 114' - 0" H TYP. OF 6 COMPACTOR SIM. 3 A12.3 D FINISH FLOOR 100' - 0" 2-T.O. PRECAST 130' - 8" 3-T.O. PRECAST 133' - 8"10' - 4"6"11' - 10"3" PREFINISHED METAL FLASHING10' - 1"2" ELSEWHERE8" @ CURB (FRONT)SMOOTH FINISH T.O. WINDOW 122' - 10" B.O. WINDOW 111' -0" FINISH FLOOR 100' - 0" T.O. STACKED RIB BAND 108' - 8" T.O. RANDOM RIB 120' - 5" T.O. EXPOSED BAND 122' - 5" 1-T.O. PRECAST 126' - 2 1/2"8' - 8"11' - 9"2' - 0"3' - 5"RANDOM RIB EXPOSURE RANDOM RIB EXPOSURE EXPOSED BAND 32"X32" STACKED PATTERN EXPOSED 8" +/-16" TYPICALFIELD VERIFY FOREVEN VERTICALLAYOUT24" TYPICALFIELD VERIFY FOREVEN VERTICALLAYOUTV-JOINTS EIFS - PREMIXED INTEGRAL COLOR (COFFEE MILK) DARK BROWN PAINT (SEE COLOR SCHEDULE FOR FORMULA) PREFINISHED METAL SILO DOME (ORANGE) 12" +/- TYP. FIELD VERIFY FOR EVEN VERTICAL LAYOUT AROUND PERIMETER REMARKSFINISHBASE MATERIALSYMBOL EXTERIOR FINISH SCHEDULE A COLOR SCUPPER COLOR TO MATCH COPING PREFINSHED NOTES: B1 PRECAST CONCRETE PANELS #1060 - PLUM EXPOSED AGGREGATE B2 PRECAST CONCRETE DECORATIVE PANELS #1013 - BUFF EXPOSED AGGREGATE C POURED CONCRETE D METAL TRIM SEE SPECIFICATION PREFINISHED E ALUMINUM ENTRANCES & STOREFRONT SEE SPECIFICATION PREFINISHED F STEEL DOOR/FRAME SEE SPECIFICATION PAINT G SECTIONAL OVERHEAD DOOR SEE SPECIFICATION PREFINISHED H SIGNAGE VERIFY COLORS W/ ARCHITECT J EPDM MEMBRANE K FLAG POLE ALUMINUM L PRECAST CONCRETE DECORATIVE PANELS WHITE/STAINED EXPOSED AGGREGATE 4'X4' +/- PATTERN, 3/4" V-GROOVE/SMOOTH M EIFS PLASTER SEE SPECIFICATION SAND BLAST 8"X16" BLOCK PATTERN - PAINTED N SILO DOME - SHEET METAL SEE SPECIFICATION PREFINISHED P ALUMINUM DISPLAY WINDOWS SEE SPECIFICATION PREFINISHED Q KNOX BOX PREFINISHED R OVERHEAD FRAMING & DECK PAINTSEE SPECIFICATION 1. COLORS & FINISHES BY ARCHITECT. PAINT ALL LOUVERS, GRILLES, PIPING & EQUIPMENT TO MATCH ALL ADJACENT WALL/ROOF/SOFFIT SURFACE UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE. (09 9000) 2. TYPICAL OF ALL OVERHEAD DOOR NUMBERS: -OVERHEAD DOOR NUMBERS ARE MOLDED PLASTIC SIGNAGE DARK BRONZE S NOT USED T WHITE EXPOSED AGGREGATE 3'-3"X3'-3" +/- PATTERN, 3/4" V-GROOVEPRECAST CONCRETE DECORATIVE PANELS SEE ELECTRICAL FOR LOCATION/QUANTITY SMOOTH SURFACE PATTERNED PRECAST LIGHT FIXTURE 2' - 0"FIN. FLR. VERIFY21'-5" TOPRE-CAST CONTRACTOR TO REMOVE TOP 9" OF HIGH RIBS TO ACCOMMODATE METAL FLASHING (NOT SHOWN), AND 72" AT ROOF OVERHANG T.O. RANDOM RIB 120' - 5" T.O. EXPOSED BAND 122' - 5" A.7 1 20" TALL X 6" DEEP LETTER SIGNAGE ON 6" PAINTED RACEWAY WIDSETH SMITH NOLTINGEngineering | Architecture | Surveying | EnvironmentalI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION,OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OFSHEET OF SHEET NO.JOB NUMBER:CHECKED BY:DATE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:WIDSETH SMITH NOLTING©2016 As indicated5/4/2017 2:59:57 PM A6.1MILLS FLEET FARMMILLS PROPERTIES, LLCMONTICELLO, MINNESOTAEXTERIOR ELEVATIONSJULY 29, 2016CJSMJA0115B0070.000MINNESOTA10/17/2016MICHAEL J. ANGLANDLIC #: 45375CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS 7/29/2016 1" = 30'-0"1 NORTH ELEVATION 1" = 30'-0"2 SOUTH ELEVATION 1" = 30'-0"3 WEST ELEVATION 1" = 30'-0"4 EAST ELEVATION 1/8" = 1'-0"5 DISPLAY WINDOWS 1/8" = 1'-0"6 PRECAST ACCENT PATTERN 1/2" = 1'-0"7 EIFS ACCENT PATTERN 1/2" = 1'-0"8 LIGHT ACCENT DETAIL 1/2" = 1'-0"9 HIGH RIB PANEL DETAIL 3/4" = 1'-0"10 EXTERIOR SIGNAGE DETAIL DATE REV# REVISIONS DESCRIPTION BY10/17/161RFP #2MJA11/09/162RFP #3MJA1/27/173SI #2MAF5/4/174RFP #8CJS4 5'-0"13'-3" 5'-3"5'-1 3/4"19' -2"15'-3"PREFINISHED METALCOPING3"-0"SIGN FOOTINGSSEE STRUCTURALRREG.GASRCAR WASH2.3991/2" SEALANT w/BACKER ROD ALLAROUND SIGNELECTRICALDISCONNECT6'-0"MESSAGE CENTER50'-0" 4'-6" 6" 2'-0"9'-0"6'-8"4'-6 14"FINISHEDDIMENSIONEIFS W/ 8" X 16" STACKEDBOND PATTERN AS SHOWN34'-0"REIFS W/ 8" X 16" STACKEDBOND PATTERN AS SHOWN50'-0"20'-8"6"4'-6"6"2'-0"9'-0"20'-8"'18'-0 12"FINISHED DIMENSIONLED ELECTRONIC GAS PRICE DISPLAYINTERNALLY LIT CABINET8'-4"6"2'-0"TENANT2'-0"TENANTACCESS PANEL(ONE SIDE ONLY, SEE SPECS.)13'-6"FUTURE TENANT SIGN1'-4"1'-4"1'-4"1'-4"ACCESS PANEL (ONE SIDE ONLY, SEE SPECS.)ACCESS PANEL (ONE SIDE ONLY, SEE SPECS.)INTERNALLY LIT SILO CAPSIGN CABINETEIFS - PREMIXED INTEGRAL COLOR(COFFEE MILK)DARK BROWN PAINT (SEE COLORSCHEDULE FOR FORMULA)EIFS - PREMIXED INTEGRAL COLOR(COFFEE MILK)OPEN CHANNEL LETTERS AND LOGOSIGN CABINETINTERNALLY LIT SILO CAPDARK BROWN PAINT (SEE COLORSCHEDULE FOR FORMULA)16'-8"1'-7"1'-7"FUTURE TENANT SIGN5A50.16A50.1GASRCAR WASH2.399_10REG8'-3"8'-0"10'-0"SIGN FOOTINGSSEE STRUCTURAL4'-2"4'-2"8'-4"8'-4"1" EIFS SYSTEM12" PRECAST WALL PANEL8" PRECAST WALL PANELSPREFINISHEDMETAL COPING1'-2"3"1'-6"ELECTRICAL CONDUITFOR SIGNAGE2" PRECAST 3" COPING (2) LAYERS 3/4" TREATED PLYWOOD8" PRECAST PANELSPREFINISHED METAL COPING© 2017 WIDSETH SMITH NOLTINGJ:\0115B-MILLS\0115B0070-Monticello\0115B0070.000-New Store\CADD\ARCH\Exterior Signage\A-SIGNS-50-1-Monticello.dwg Plotted by:Tim Ramerth 5/5/2017 7:09:18 AMCONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS 07/29/20161MAIN STORE PYLON SIGN EAST/WEST ELEVATION1/4" = 1'-0"2MAIN STORE PYLON SIGN NORTH/SOUTH ELEVATION1/4" = 1'-0"SHEET NO.JOB NUMBER: CHECKED BY: DATE: SCALE: DRAWN BY: DATE WIDSETH SMITH NOLTING Engineering | Architecture | Surveying | Environmental REVISIONS DESCRIPTIONREV#BY LIC. NO.DATE: MILLS FLEET FARM MILLS PROPERTIES, LLC MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA SIGNAGEA50.1JULY 29, 2016 AS SHOWN CJS MJA 0115B0070.000 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. MICHAEL J. ANGLAND 07/29/2016 45375 1/27/17 SI #2 MAF 5/3/2017 RFP #8 - SIGNAGE CJS3MAIN STORE MONUMENT SIGN EAST/WEST ELEVATION1/4" = 1'-0"6PRECAST DETAIL3/4" = 1'-0"5COPING DETAIL3/4" = 1'-0"2 2 Bitro Group, Inc. – Note this Caution: This layout is an Estimate.“Recommendation #1: Test a typical letter using this layout before you move forward with the rest of the sign. Recommendation #2: Before shipping or installation at a jobsite; light your letters in a darkened area to assure yourself that you are satisfied that it works properly. Be aware that since construction standards and performance expectations can vary from client to client, Bitro Group, Inc. cannot be held responsible for your results. Recommendation #3: We strongly recommend that you check our layout before you proceed with your entire sign. Then, using the knowledge you have gained through your own testing and have learned what works successfully for you, proceed accordingly. Remember, every variable alters the outcome including but not limited to: letter depth, shape of the letter, placement of the modules, reflectivity and color of the interior of the letter, thickness, type of plex, and manufacture of the plex used (sometimes plex will even vary in translucence from sheet to sheet from the same manufacture.) Please take your time to do the testing at the beginning of each project to assure your success upon completion. Assumptions: The following information and standards are not concrete and may vary however; we have found that if you are using a Blue or Green face, this estimate is based on using 2447 White plex with vinyl overlay of a medium color shade. Using darker or lighter vinyl or using a different pigmented plex may cause results to vary. If using a Red face, this estimate is based on 2793 pigment plex. Be aware that 2283 and 2415 can be difficult to light evenly. Be sure to test a letter and follow what you have learned for the rest of your letters for this sign. Also, 7328 White is a common plex used, however, testing has found as much as a 20% variation from sheet to sheet with samples tested, thus be careful and look for this issue. Please be aware that White, Blue and Green are laid out on 4” centers, while Red, Orange and Amber are laid out using 5” centers. Notifications: This LED layout is the property of Bitro Group, Inc. and is not to be shared with third party entities without written approval from Bitro Group, Inc.”Your LED Lighting Partner© 2017-2018 Bitro Group Inc. The artistic works depicted herein are copyright and are the exclusive property of Bitro Group Inc. and as such cannot be reproduced in whole or in part without prior written consent.300 Lodi St.Hackensack, NJ 07601www.bitrogroup.comFor layouts & quotations:estimate@bitrogroup.comestimate@bitrogroup.comTel (201) 641-1004Fax (201) 641-0057AB12345678910111213141516CDEFGHCustomer NameJob DescripƟonJob #Sign HeightSign DepthStroke WidthDateLayout By:Drawing #SCALE: NTS15’ Reverse Channel+* SSD: MOQ= 1 trayNagle SignLED C.L.Mills5ft_FLEET FARM7.5”4/17/2017hcD170417_x10_nagleS_mills_5FT_REVERSEHalo-lit LED Channel LettersMILLSFLEETLOGOF ARMtotalwaƩage27 10 15 15 27 40 34 47 47 36 128 45 49 52 67 639 575.1Ref # Part Number Description Qty Unit w/unitunit/power supply1OTSP-M3PL-BW65 OpticsPro Plus Bright White 6500K639mods 0.9 602ASU-60-12U 60W-12V Power Supply16pcs N/A N/A345*Power supply in each letter* Bitro Group, Inc. – Note this Caution: This layout is an Estimate.“Recommendation #1: Test a typical letter using this layout before you move forward with the rest of the sign. Recommendation #2: Before shipping or installation at a jobsite; light your letters in a darkened area to assure yourself that you are satisfied that it works properly. Be aware that since construction standards and performance expectations can vary from client to client, Bitro Group, Inc. cannot be held responsible for your results. Recommendation #3: We strongly recommend that you check our layout before you proceed with your entire sign. Then, using the knowledge you have gained through your own testing and have learned what works successfully for you, proceed accordingly. Remember, every variable alters the outcome including but not limited to: letter depth, shape of the letter, placement of the modules, reflectivity and color of the interior of the letter, thickness, type of plex, and manufacture of the plex used (sometimes plex will even vary in translucence from sheet to sheet from the same manufacture.) Please take your time to do the testing at the beginning of each project to assure your success upon completion. Assumptions: The following information and standards are not concrete and may vary however; we have found that if you are using a Blue or Green face, this estimate is based on using 2447 White plex with vinyl overlay of a medium color shade. Using darker or lighter vinyl or using a different pigmented plex may cause results to vary. If using a Red face, this estimate is based on 2793 pigment plex. Be aware that 2283 and 2415 can be difficult to light evenly. Be sure to test a letter and follow what you have learned for the rest of your letters for this sign. Also, 7328 White is a common plex used, however, testing has found as much as a 20% variation from sheet to sheet with samples tested, thus be careful and look for this issue. Please be aware that White, Blue and Green are laid out on 4” centers, while Red, Orange and Amber are laid out using 5” centers. Notifications: This LED layout is the property of Bitro Group, Inc. and is not to be shared with third party entities without written approval from Bitro Group, Inc.”Your LED Lighting Partner© 2017-2018 Bitro Group Inc. The artistic works depicted herein are copyright and are the exclusive property of Bitro Group Inc. and as such cannot be reproduced in whole or in part without prior written consent.300 Lodi St.Hackensack, NJ 07601www.bitrogroup.comFor layouts & quotations:estimate@bitrogroup.comestimate@bitrogroup.comTel (201) 641-1004Fax (201) 641-0057AB12345678910111213141516CDEFGHCustomer NameJob DescripƟonJob #Sign HeightSign DepthStroke WidthDateLayout By:Drawing #SCALE: NTS1Kerosene+* SSD: MOQ= 1 trayNagle SignLED C.L.Mills14”, KEROSENE3”, 2” stand off4/17/2017hcD170417_x7_nagleS_mills_KEROSENEHalo-lit LED Channel letters & Logologo K E R O S E N E total waƩage15 5 5 6 6 6 5 7 5 60 54Ref # Part Number Description Qty Unit w/unitunit/power supply1OTSP-M3PL-BW65 OpticsPro Plus Bright White 6500K60mods 0.9 602ASU-60-12U 60W-12V Power Supply1pcs N/A N/A J:\0115B-MILLS\0115B0070-Monticello\0115B0070.000-New Store\Permits\City of Monticello\Land Use\2016-06-01 Signage Areas.xlsProperty Building Wall Wall Area Sign AreasTotal Sign Area % Coverage RemarksSouthRetail BuildingSouth WallEast WallNorth Wall 476 FT. 26 FT. 12,376 S.F. 45 S.F. 17 S.F. 13 S.F. 17 S.F. 410 S.F. 33 S.F. 33 S.F. 17 S.F. 585 S.F. 5%West Wall 346 FT. 26 FT. 8,996 S.F. 216 S.F.216 S.F. 2%Car WashSouth Wall 72 FT. 14 FT. 1,008 S.F. 9 S.F. 9 S.F. 9 S.F. 3 S.F. 20 S.F. 50 S.F. 5% Facade includes one row of exposed LED strip lighting.East Wall 88 FT. 14 FT. 1,232 S.F. 11 S.F. 10 S.F. 7 S.F. 3 S.F. 20 S.F. 20 S.F. 71 S.F. 6%North Wall 72 FT. 14 FT. 1,008 S.F. 20 S.F. 5 S.F. 5 S.F. 5 S.F.35 S.F. 3%West Wall 88 FT. 14 FT. 1,232 S.F. 20 S.F.20 S.F. 2% Facade includes one row of exposed LED strip lighting.Monument SignEast Face100 S.F. 31 S.F. 40 S.F.171 S.F. N/AWest Face100 S.F. 31 S.F. 40 S.F.171 S.F. N/AGas CanopySouth Elevation 121 FT. 3.5 FT. 424 S.F. 14 S.F.14 S.F. 3% Face of canopy includes two rows of exposed LED strip lighting.East Elevation 52 FT. 3.5 FT. 182 S.F. 14 S.F.14 S.F. 8% Face of canopy includes two rows of exposed LED strip lighting.North Elevation 121 FT. 3.5 FT. 424 S.F. 14 S.F.14 S.F. 3% Face of canopy includes two rows of exposed LED strip lighting.West Elevation 52 FT. 3.5 FT. 182 S.F. 14 S.F.14 S.F. 8% Face of canopy includes two rows of exposed LED strip lighting.NorthPylon SignEast Face93 S.F. 52 S.F. 27 S.F. 27 S.F.199 S.F. N/AWest Face93 S.F. 52 S.F. 27 S.F. 27 S.F.199 S.F. N/AWall DimensionsMonticello Mills Fleet FarmSignage Calculation6/1/2016 Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/2017 1 2D. Public Hearing – Consideration of a request for rezoning to Planned Unit Development, Development Stage Planned Unit Development, and Preliminary Plat for Spaeth Industrial Park for a multi-lot industrial development in an I-2 (Heavy Industrial) District. Applicant: Spaeth, Ken (NAC) Property: Legal: Lot 2, Block 3, Oakwood Industrial Park PID: 155018003020 Planning Case Number: 2017 - 017 A. REFERENCE & BACKGROUND: Request(s): Subdivide an existing 4.4 acre industrial parcel along the south side of Dundas Road into eight separate parcels, each accommodating a single building and parking bay, along with easement access to common truck circulation areas, utilities, stormwater management, and access drives. Deadline for Decision: July 7th, 2017 Land Use Designation: Places to Work Zoning Designation: I-2, Heavy Industrial The purpose of the "I-2," Heavy Industrial District is to provide for the establishment of heavy industrial and manufacturing development and use which because of the nature of the product or character of activity requires isolation from residential or commercial use Overlays/Environmental Regulations Applicable: NA Current Site Use: Vacant Surrounding Land Uses: North: Industrial East: Industrial South: Multi-family Residential West: Industrial Project Description: The applicant is proposing a multi-lot and building industrial park. Each building is 6,976 square feet in area, for a cumulative total of 55,808 square feet of floor area. Because only the front two parcels front on Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/2017 2 Dundas Road, with 6 parcels served by an internal private common drive, the project requires PUD zoning. The layout of the project relies on a perimeter drive that provides access to, alternatively, parking areas serving the front access points of the buildings, then common truck courts that provide truck access to the service sides of each building. The parking and “front” access areas face outward to the north and south of the parcel, including toward Dundas Road on the north, and toward a stormwater pond and then the residential development to the south. The truck and service portions of each of the buildings is internal to the project. The project is anticipated to attract smaller individual industrial concerns that require spaces for office, fabrication, repair, warehousing, and possibly, limited areas of showroom. Occupants would have the opportunity to purchase individual lots subject to the overall PUD and association management requirements. Each building has about 12 parking spaces allocated to their parcel, however, it will be necessary that the parking and grounds will be commonly maintained under an association, so parking quantities would be shared between parcels. ANALYSIS This project was reviewed as a Concept Planned Unit Development proposal earlier this spring. The proposed Preliminary Plat and Development Stage PUD plans follow the layout of the concept plan. Traffic will enter the one-way perimeter drive aisle on the west side of the property, and enter the parking bays, or truck courts, as appropriate. Typically, the parking bays will provide access to the front entry/office spaces for each of the buildings. The truck court areas will provide access for delivery vehicles or company trucks, etc. to overhead doors for loading and unloading purposes. Exiting traffic will circulate to the east side of the property to leave via the one-way exit lane. Because the perimeter lanes are designed for one-way traffic only, at 20 feet in width, it will be important to properly sign the site to ensure that the drives will function as designed. “Enter Only” or “Exit Only” signs, as well as pavement markings, should be planned to direct traffic as needed. The City Engineer has provided comment on the applicant’s circulation plan. Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/2017 3 As the site circulation relies on clear routes for the fully-developed parcel, it will be important that no outdoor storage occurs on the parcels as platted. This would include trash disposal, which should be handled indoors. For large vehicles to meet turning movements in and out of the truck courts, they must remain clear of obstruction. As a note, the applicant should update the truck-turning templates to show full-size semi-trucks in and out of the truck court areas – the current template follows the center-line, which limits truck turning. It is expected that there is adequate room using the full width of the truck court, but this should be verified by the applicant. Other staff analysis of the proposal includes the following: Landscaping. Quantities for landscaping are consistent with the City’s general landscape requirements, and include a planting of spruce trees along the south boundary which will screen the use from the abutting residential area. Combined with the ponding area in this location, the plan meets the separation requirements of the bufferyard regulations (at least 20 feet). Those standards also include a requirement for complete landscaping screen. As such, the spruce trees should be no more than 12 feet on center to accomplish this requirement. This would result in a total planting of 25 spruce trees, increased from the 17 proposed. Because the office face of the buildings faces south, and keeps truck operations to the truck court, the building will screen the truck activity, and potential impacts are lessened with this design. One note regarding the landscape materials – staff would suggest replacing River Birch in the rear area with something more long-lived. Birch trees tend to fail much earlier than other overstory trees. Parking. Automobile parking is provided at an average of one space per 581 sf gross, plus truck court temporary space for loading. This ratio should be more than adequate for these buildings, which would do very limited retail customer traffic. Signage. The applicant has planned for wall signage, but has not provided specific drawings. Because only two of the planned eight buildings would face Dundas Road, the front entry of each building would be considered to be the “front” for sign purposes. At 15% of building façade, each building would be allowed approximately 260 square feet of wall signage. The applicant should specify a common signage plan (showing locations and sizes of allowable signs with the PUD) as a condition, to be provided as part of Final PUD approval. Building Design/Materials. The applicant has proposed metal buildings for each of the eight building in the project. A masonry, cultured stone, wainscot is shown on the “front” (Dundas Road) side of the northernmost buildings, and the south entry side of Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/2017 4 the southernmost buildings. The sides and truck-court “rear” of each building, as well as the entry walls of the four middle buildings, show a metal wainscot with an alternative color. Lighting. The applicant has planned for wall-mounted lighting, with a downcast cover to avoid glare onto adjoining property. The photometric plan shows zero or 0.1 foot-candles readings at the west, north, and east property lines, and the southern stormwater pond separates the lighting from the nearest residential property. Fixture specification also meet code requirements. Plat. The proposed plat includes a total of eight lots, each containing one building. As noted previously, each of the lots will be served by a private drive that encircles the project. Lot sizes range from just under 20,400 square feet to just over 32,000 square feet in area. Only lots 1 and 2 front on a public street (Dundas Road). The two southernmost lots are the largest, and include the stormwater pond and buffer plantings, an area of approximately 20,000 square feet between the two parcels. The layout of the plat requires the creation of an association responsibility for common maintenance of private property. Cross parking and access would be a component of the covenants applicable under this PUD to ensure continued accessibility and operation. The easements and declarations should be subject to review and approval by the City Attorney. Staff notes that there is a question regarding the south boundary line of the property. A narrow strip of land abuts the property between the Oakwood Industrial Park properties and the Klein Farms land to the south. Staff has asked the applicant to verify the legal description of the proposal as a condition of plat approval. At the time of the preparation of this report, staff’s understanding is that the southern boundary line will be adjusted to reflect the accurate boundary of the proposed plat area. The City Engineer will have comments relating to the civil components of the plat in a separate letter. The City Engineer has made detailed comments relating to the proposed stormwater management. The applicant will be required to provide detailed information on maintenance of the system as part of a stormwater maintenance agreement and within the cross easement and maintenance agreement for the development. To accommodate these and other requirements of the PUD, the applicant will be required to execute a development agreement relating to PUD approvals, including an incorporation of the phasing elements of the project. Finally, the applicant will need to work with the City Building and Street departments to arrange addressing and mailbox requirements for the project. Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/2017 5 B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Decision 1 – Rezoning to Planned Unit Development District, and Development Stage PUD approval. 1. Motion to adopt Resolution No. PC-2017 - 012, recommending approval of the rezoning to PUD District for Spaeth Industrial Park, and the proposed Development Stage PUD approval, based on the findings in said resolution, and subject to the conditions of Exhibit Z of the Staff report. 2. Motion to deny adoption of Resolution No. PC-2017 - 012, based on findings stated at the public hearing. 3. Motion to table the resolution, subject to submission of additional information. Decision 2 – Preliminary Plat approval for Spaeth Industrial Park. 1. Motion to adopt Resolution No. PC-2017 - 013, recommending approval of the Preliminary Plat for Spaeth Industrial Park, based on the findings in said resolution, and subject to the conditions of Exhibit Z of the Staff report. 2. Motion to deny adoption of Resolution No. PC-2017 - 013, based on findings stated at the public hearing. 3. Motion to table the resolution, subject to submission of additional information. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the PUD and Preliminary Plat as submitted, Alternative 1 for each of the two Planning Commission decisions. The proposed layout is designed to provide an opportunity for small businesses to establish themselves in the Monticello market by creating buildings that can be owned by individual businesses. Expanding the market for such businesses is consistent with the intent of the Economic Development objectives of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. By designing the project as proposed, the project is also consistent with the City’s interest in protecting residential neighborhoods from industrial intrusions. D. SUPPORTING DATA: A. Resolution PC-2017-012 B. Resolution PC-2017-013 C. Draft, Ordinance No. 6XX, Spaeth Industrial Park PUD D. Aerial Site Image E. Applicant Narrative Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/2017 6 F. PUD Development Plans, including: a. Project Location Plan, Title b. Site Plan c. Grading and Drainage Plan d. Sanitary & Water Utility Plan e. Landscape Plan f. SWPPP g. Existing Conditions and Removals Plan h. Details i. Phasing Plan j. Elevations k. Floor Plan l. Photometrics G. Preliminary Plat H. ALTA Survey I. Fire Truck Circulation Plan J. Fire Hydrant Coverage Plan K. Stormwater Calculations, online only L. City Engineer’s Letter, dated May 31, 2017 Z. Conditions of Approval Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/2017 7 EXHIBIT Z Spaeth Industrial Park – PUD Zoning and Preliminary Plat PID 155018003020 Lot 2, Block 3, Oakwood Industrial Park 1. Research and revise the Plat and PUD plans as necessary based on the issues raised by the south boundary line with Klein Farms Estates 2nd Addition. 2. As a part of the Final PUD application, provide a Sign Plan for the PUD consistent with City code requirements. 3. Prepare a site circulation signage plan for entry, exiting, and pavement markings as approved by the City Engineer. 4. Prepare cross-access and parking easements and maintenance covenants, and enter into a development agreement with the City, meeting the requirements of the City Attorney for maintenance and required improvements. 5. Update the circulation plan to show full truck turning movements consistent with the comments in the staff report. 6. Verify internal trash handling equipment, and prohibit outdoor storage as a part of the project PUD approvals. 7. Coordinate addressing and mailbox installations with City Building and Streets departments. 8. Increase south bufferyard planting as noted in the staff report. 9. Compliance with the terms and requirements of the City Engineer’s report. 10. Compliance with the comments of other staff and Planning Commission. CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-012 1 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A REZONING TO “SPAETH INDUSTRIAL PARK PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT” AND DEVELOPMENT STAGE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR SPAETH INDUSTRIAL PARK WHEREAS, the applicant owns property along Dundas Road, PID No. 15501800302; and WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted a request to rezone its property to PUD, subdivide it into eight parcels, and develop it as a common industrial project; and WHEREAS, the applicant concurrently proposes to develop the property for industrial uses; and WHEREAS, the site is guided for industrial uses under the label “Places to Work” in the City’s Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the proposed PUD, along with the companion Plat, are consistent with the long-term use and development of the property for industrial uses; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 6, 2017 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 PUD provides an appropriate means of furthering the intent of the Comprehensive Plan for the site by putting the existing and proposed buildings to industrial use. 2. The proposed improvements on the site under the Development Stage PUD are consistent with the needs of the PUD in this location as an industrial area. 3. The improvements will have expected impacts on public services, including sewer, water, stormwater treatment, and traffic which have been planned to serve the property for the development as proposed. 4.. The PUD flexibility for the project, including parcels without public street frontage, are consistent with the intent of the City’s economic development objectives, as well as with the intent of the PUD zoning regulations. CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-012 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota, that the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the Monticello City Council approves the Rezoning and Development Stage PUD, subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit Z as follows: 1. Research and revise the Plat and PUD plans as necessary based on the issues raised by the south boundary line with Klein Farms Estates 2nd Addition. 2. As a part of the Final PUD application, provide a Sign Plan for the PUD consistent with City code requirements. 3. Prepare a site circulation signage plan for entry, exiting, and pavement markings as approved by the City Engineer. 4. Prepare cross-access and parking easements and maintenance covenants, and enter into a development agreement with the City, meeting the requirements of the City Attorney for maintenance and required improvements. 5. Update the circulation plan to show full truck turning movements consistent with the comments in the staff report. 6. Verify internal trash handling equipment, and prohibit outdoor storage as a part of the project PUD approvals. 7. Coordinate addressing and mailbox installations with City Building and Streets departments. 8. Increase south bufferyard planting as noted in the staff report. 9. Compliance with the terms and requirements of the City Engineer’s report. 10. Compliance with the comments of other staff and Planning Commission. ADOPTED this 6th day of June, 2016, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota. MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-012 3 By: _______________________________ Brad Fyle, Chair ATTEST: ____________________________________________ Angela Schumann, Community Development Director CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-013 1 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR SPAETH INDUSTRIAL PARK WHEREAS, the applicant owns property along Dundas Road, PID No. 15501800302; and WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted a request to plat said property into eight parcels, and develop it as a common industrial project under a PUD; and WHEREAS, the applicant concurrently proposes to develop the property for industrial uses; and WHEREAS, the site is guided for industrial uses under the label “Places to Work” in the City’s Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the proposed PUD, along with the companion Plat, are consistent with the long-term use and development of the property for industrial uses; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 6, 2017 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 Plat provides an appropriate means of furthering the intent of the Comprehensive Plan for the site by putting the existing and proposed buildings to industrial use. 2. The proposed improvements on the site under the Preliminary Plat are consistent with the needs of the development in this location as an industrial area. 3. The improvements will have expected impacts on public services, including sewer, water, stormwater treatment, and traffic which have been planned to serve the property for the development as proposed. 4.. The PUD flexibility for the project, including parcels without public street frontage, are consistent with the intent of the City’s economic development objectives, as well as with the intent of the PUD zoning regulations. CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-013 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota, that the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the Monticello City Council approves the Preliminary Plat for Spaeth Industrial Park, subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit Z of the staff report as follows: 1. Research and revise the Plat and PUD plans as necessary based on the issues raised by the south boundary line with Klein Farms Estates 2nd Addition. 2. As a part of the Final PUD application, provide a Sign Plan for the PUD consistent with City code requirements. 3. Prepare a site circulation signage plan for entry, exiting, and pavement markings as approved by the City Engineer. 4. Prepare cross-access and parking easements and maintenance covenants, and enter into a development agreement with the City, meeting the requirements of the City Attorney for maintenance and required improvements. 5. Update the circulation plan to show full truck turning movements consistent with the comments in the staff report. 6. Verify internal trash handling equipment, and prohibit outdoor storage as a part of the project PUD approvals. 7. Coordinate addressing and mailbox installations with City Building and Streets departments. 8. Increase south bufferyard planting as noted in the staff report. 9. Compliance with the terms and requirements of the City Engineer’s report. 10. Compliance with the comments of other staff and Planning Commission. ADOPTED this 6th day of June, 2016, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota. MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-013 3 By: _______________________________ Brad Fyle, Chair ATTEST: ____________________________________________ Angela Schumann, Community Development Director ORDINANCE NO. 6XX 1 CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 10 OF THE MONTICELLO CITY CODE, KNOWN AS THE ZONING ORDINANCE, BY ESTABLISHING THE SPAETH INDUSTRIAL PARK PUD AS A ZONING DISTRICT IN THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, AND REZONING THE FOLLOWING PROPERTY FROM I-2, HEAVY DISTRICT TO SPAETH INDUSTRIAL PARK PUD, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT: LOT 2 BLOCK 3, OAKWOOD INDUSTRIAL PARK THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTICELLO HEREBY ORDAINS: Section 1. Section 2.4(O) – Planned Unit Developments, Title 10 – Zoning Ordinance is hereby amended by adding the following: (XX) Spaeth Industrial Park PUD District (a) Purpose. The purpose of the Spaeth Industrial Park PUD District is to provide for the development of certain real estate subject to the District for industrial land uses. (b) Permitted Uses. Permitted principal uses in the Spaeth Industrial Park PUD District shall be indoor industrial uses as found in the I-2, Heavy Industrial District of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance, subject to the approved Final Stage Development Plans dated _____, and development agreement dated ____, 2017, as may be amended. The introduction of any other use from any district, including Conditional Uses in the I-2 District, shall be reviewed under the requirements of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 2, Section (O) – Planned Unit Developments for Development Stage PUD and Final Stage PUD.. (c) Accessory Uses. Accessory uses shall be those commonly accessory and incidental to industrial uses, and as specifically identified by the approved final stage PUD plans, but shall not include outdoor storage or other activities. (d) District Performance Standards. Performance standards for the development of any lot in the Spaeth Industrial Park PUD District shall adhere to the approved final stage PUD plans and development agreement. In such case where any proposed improvement or use is not addressed by the Final Stage PUD, then the regulations of the I-2, ORDINANCE NO. 6XX 2 Heavy Industrial District shall apply. (e) Amendments. Where changes to the PUD are proposed in the manner of use, density, site plan, development layout, building size, mass, or coverage, or any other change, the proposer shall apply for an amendment to the PUD under the terms of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance, Section 2.4 (O)(10). The City may require that substantial changes in overall use of the PUD property be processed as a new project, including a zoning district amendment. Section 2. The zoning map of the City of Monticello is hereby amendment to rezoned the following described parcels from I-2, Heavy Industrial District to Spaeth Industrial Park PUD, Planned Unit Development District: Lot 2, Block 3, Oakwood Industrial Park Addition to Monticello (subject to the replat as Lots 1-8, Block 1, Spaeth Industrial Park). Section 3. The City Clerk is hereby directed to mark the official zoning map to reflect this ordinance. The map shall not be republished at this time. Section 4. The City Clerk is hereby directed to make the changes required by this Ordinance as part of the Official Monticello City Code, Title 10, Zoning Ordinance, and to renumber the tables and chapters accordingly as necessary to provide the intended effect of this Ordinance. The City Clerk is further directed to make necessary corrections to any internal citations that result from said renumbering process, provided that such changes retain the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance as has been adopted. Section 5. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force from and after its passage and publication. The ordinance in its entirety and map shall be posted on the City website after publication. Copies of the complete Ordinance and map are available online and at Monticello City Hall for examination upon request. ADOPTED BY the Monticello City Council this ___ day of ____, 2017. __________________________________ Brian Stumpf, Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ Jeff O’Neill, Administrator ORDINANCE NO. 6XX 3 AYES: NAYS: Sp a eth , Ken - R eq uest fo r R ezo nin g to PUD, Dev elop men t Sta ge PUD , & Prelimin a ry Plat Lot 2, Block 3 O akwood Industrial Park | 155-018-003020 | 107 Dundas Road C reated by : C ity of Monticello 285 ft Ken Spaeth Masonry 108 Meadowlark Rd. Se. St. Michael, MN 56557 612-889-3100 05-05-2017 City of Monticello The purpose of the project is to provide individuals or small companies with a land option where they can own or lease a building that makes it affordable for their business. The project would have small lots that will allow them to construct a 4,000-6000 sq. ft. building. The goal is to provide a cost-effective option that they can have ownership while keeping their payments to 3-4000.00 per month. The clients are anticipated to be small businesses that need an office and warehouse. Could be construction related or small business. There is a very strong need for this in the Monticello area without any current options. There are not many comparables for this type project. Pfeifer property management in Buffalo has something similar and it is full. The difference is that his buildings are only available for lease. He does not offer the option of a lot sale. His tenants are plumbers, electricians, computer I.T. and other small business owners. A PUD is required, for the subject property, because the project will have a private street vs. a public street. The requirements for public street would use up too much of the property. Also, a city street is more expensive and the goal is to keep the project affordable. The project will be governed by an association agreement that lease tenants and properties that are owner occupied will have to abide by. The concept is to not have a semi-truck park, but the site is designed to accommodate limited truck traffic. We don’t anticipate any loading docks. The buildings will be post-frame buildings with 2-tone metal cladding. Any building sides facing Dundas street will have a brick or stone wainscoat up 3-4 ft. We will bring sewer and water in from Dundas with individual meters for each tenant. Storm water will be handled on site. We realize that there are townhomes to the south of the project. We have a very extensive landscape plan for this area with a berm and trees. We will also have a chain link fence across the back of the property. Around the buildings we’ll have a 3 ft. wide area for landscape rock and on the street side have shrubs. All grass areas will be sodded. All landscaped areas will be irrigated. I expect the project could take 3-4 years to complete. My goal is to own 2-3 buildings myself and sell the remaining lots to owner occupied users. My intent is to provide a small business park that both the city of Monticello and myself can be proud of. Thanks for your time. Ken Spaeth CIVIL ENGINEERINGSITE DESIGNSITEMONTICELLO, MINNESOTAWRIGHT COUNTYSITESITEMINNESOTASITE IMPROVEMENT PROJECTPRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTIONSPAETH INDUSTRIAL PARKINDEX OF CIVIL SITE DRAWINGS: DUNDAS ROADSURVEY DATAPROJECT LOCATIONEXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTIONCIVIL ENGINEERING SITE DESIGNC1 PRELIM INARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTION GENERAL NOTES:SITE PLAN NOTES:KEY NOTES: SITE DATA: PARKING DATA: SETBACK: LEGEND: 108 Meadowlark Road SE St. Michael, MN 55376 612-889-3100 spaethmasonry@gmail.com KEN SPAETHINDEX OF CIVIL SITE DRAWINGS: FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50DUNDAS ROADSURVEY DATAPROJECT LOCATIONEXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTIONCIVIL ENGINEERING SITE DESIGN PRELIM INARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTION 108 Meadowlark Road SE St. Michael, MN 55376 612-889-3100 spaethmasonry@gmail.com KEN SPAETHINDEX OF CIVIL SITE DRAWINGS: C2 FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50DUNDAS ROADSURVEY DATAPROJECT LOCATIONEXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTIONCIVIL ENGINEERING SITE DESIGN PRELIM INARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTION 108 Meadowlark Road SE St. Michael, MN 55376 612-889-3100 spaethmasonry@gmail.com KEN SPAETHINDEX OF CIVIL SITE DRAWINGS: C3 FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50DUNDAS ROADSURVEY DATAPROJECT LOCATIONEXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTIONCIVIL ENGINEERING SITE DESIGN PRELIM INARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTION 108 Meadowlark Road SE St. Michael, MN 55376 612-889-3100 spaethmasonry@gmail.com KEN SPAETHINDEX OF CIVIL SITE DRAWINGS: C4 FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50DUNDAS ROAD” ” ” ” SURVEY DATAPROJECT LOCATIONEXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTIONCIVIL ENGINEERING SITE DESIGN PRELIM INARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTION 108 Meadowlark Road SE St. Michael, MN 55376 612-889-3100 spaethmasonry@gmail.com KEN SPAETHINDEX OF CIVIL SITE DRAWINGS: C5 FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50DUNDAS ROADSURVEY DATAPROJECT LOCATIONEXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTIONCIVIL ENGINEERING SITE DESIGN PRELIM INARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTION 108 Meadowlark Road SE St. Michael, MN 55376 612-889-3100 spaethmasonry@gmail.com KEN SPAETHINDEX OF CIVIL SITE DRAWINGS: SWPP NARRATIVEPOLLUTION PREVENTION NOTESEROSION CONTROL INSTALLATION SCHEDULEEROSION CONTROL NOTESEROSION CONTROL MAINTENANCE SCHEDULERESPONSIBLE PARTYTO BE DETERMINEDRUNOFF ROUTING OFFSITEVEGITATION GROUND COVER SCHEDULEIMPERVIOUS AND DISTURBANCE AREASEROSION CONTROL QUANTITIESC6 DUNDAS ROADSURVEY DATAPROJECT LOCATIONEXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTIONCIVIL ENGINEERING SITE DESIGN PRELIM INARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTION 108 Meadowlark Road SE St. Michael, MN 55376 612-889-3100 spaethmasonry@gmail.com KEN SPAETHINDEX OF CIVIL SITE DRAWINGS: DEMOLITION NOTES C7 CIVIL ENGINEERINGSITE DESIGNINDEX OF CIVIL SITE DRAWINGS: CONCRETE PAVEMENT - SIDEWALKBITUMINOUS PAVEMENTCONCRETE PAVEMENT - HEAVY DUTYHANDICAP SIGNFINISH GRADE3"2'-0"1'-0"CONCRETE12"18"18"5'WHITE ON BLUEBLACK ON WHITEW/ 1.5" LETTERSTHIS SIGN TYP @ EACHHANDICAP PARKING SPACE3" GALVANIZED STEEL POLEINFILTRATION BASIN GENERAL NOTES: FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50DUNDAS ROADSURVEY DATAPROJECT LOCATIONEXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTIONCIVIL ENGINEERING SITE DESIGN PRELIM INARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTION 108 Meadowlark Road SE St. Michael, MN 55376 612-889-3100 spaethmasonry@gmail.com KEN SPAETHINDEX OF CIVIL SITE DRAWINGS: C9PHASE 2PHASE 1PHASE 3PHASE 4 DUNDAS ROADSURVEY DATAPROJECT LOCATIONEXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTIONCIVIL ENGINEERING SITE DESIGN1/1SITE DATA: PARKING DATA: SETBACK: 108 Meadowlark Road SE St. Michael, MN 55376 612-889-3100 spaethmasonry@gmail.com KEN SPAETH Ticket Check Status Ticket Number: 170740852 As of 3/21/17 13:15 CDT, participating facility owners have responded to Ticket Check as follows: Company Name Facility Types Status Time Comments TDS TELECOM - BRDGWT01 Marked 03/16/17 9:06 AM CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS - CHACAB03 TV,FO Not yet responded 03/15/17 1:18 PM CITY OF MONTICELLO/FIBERNET - CMTCLO01 E,FO,S,W Non- Excavation 03/16/17 11:23 AM CENTER POINT ENERGY - MINGAS04 G Clear/No conflict 03/21/17 11:25 AM Clear gas and power. NORTHERN NATURAL GAS - NNGAS03 G Clear/No conflict 03/16/17 8:30 AM XCEL ENERGY - XCEL01 Clear/No conflict 03/21/17 11:26 AM FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50DUNDAS ROAD30°60° 90° 12 0 °150°180°44.899ftMin Radius(Outer Wheel)30.844ftMin Radius(Inner Wheel)50.033ftMin Radius(Outer Body)17.388ft41.01ft30. 5 0 5 f tMax Kickout 1.178ft39.1679.82317.0834.829Oshkosh TI-3000 Aircraft Rescue & Firefighting VehicleOverall Length39.167ftOverall Width10.000ftOverall Body Height11.831ftMin Body Ground Clearance1.612ftTrack Width9.583ftLock-to-lock time4.00sWall to Wall Turning Radius50.033ftSURVEY DATAPROJECT LOCATIONEXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTIONCIVIL ENGINEERING SITE DESIGN 108 Meadowlark Road SE St. Michael, MN 55376 612-889-3100 spaethmasonry@gmail.com KEN SPAETH 1/1 FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50FFE=963.50DUNDAS ROADSURVEY DATAPROJECT LOCATIONEXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTIONCIVIL ENGINEERING SITE DESIGN 108 Meadowlark Road SE St. Michael, MN 55376 612-889-3100 spaethmasonry@gmail.com KEN SPAETH 1/1 Spaeth Industrial Park Site Improvement Project 107 Dundas Road Monticello, MN DRAINAGE ANALYSIS Prepared for: Ken Spaeth 108 Meadowlake Road SE St. Michael, MN 55376 Phone: (612) 889-3100 spaethmasonry@gmail.com Prepared by: Civil Engineering Site Design Attn: Scott Dahlke PO Box 566 118 East Broadway Street Monticello, MN 55362 Phone: (763) 314-0929 sdahlke@civilesd.com May 08, 2017 CESD Project # 00633 Spaeth Industrial Park, Monticello, MN Drainage Analysis Page 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Narrative o Proposed Project o Site Location o Requirements o Rate Calculations o Existing Site Conditions o Proposed Site Conditions o Volume Abstraction and Water Quality Calculations o Soils Data o Summary o Certification Appendix A – Existing Conditions Drainage Calculations o Existing Conditions Drainage Area Map o 2-Year (2.81-Inch), 24-Hour Event o 10-Year (4.18-Inch), 24-Hour Event o 100-Year (6.93-Inch), 24-Hour Event Appendix B – Proposed Condition Drainage Calculations o Proposed Conditions Drainage Area Map o 2-Year (2.81-Inch), 24-Hour Event o 10-Year (4.18-Inch), 24-Hour Event o 100-Year (6.93-Inch), 24-Hour Event Appendix C – Volume Abstraction 1.0” Rainfall on New Impervious Surface o Infiltration Worksheet o Stage-Storage Containment Volume Appendix D – Soils Data o Soils Data per Web Soil Survey Spaeth Industrial Park, Monticello, MN Drainage Analysis Page 3 NARRATIVE PROPOSED PROJECT: The project proposes site improvements for multiple small industrial buildings. Site improvements include new buildings, pavement, utilities, and associated items. The project proposes collection of impervious surface drainage with storm sewer configured to function as an underground infiltration system with overflow storm water routed to existing roadside ditch of Dundas Road. SITE LOCATION: The site address is 107 Dundas Road in the City of Monticello, MN. The project is in the SW 1/4 of the NE1/4, Section 14, Township 121, Range 25, Wright County, MN. Access to the site can be achieved from Dundas Road along the north boundary. REQUIREMENTS: Stormwater management design for the project is subject to review by the Monticello. Stormwater requirements for the project as received from City staff are as follows: This property falls within a subwatershed that discharges to a regional pond to the northeast. The regional pond was designed in the City’s Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan and assumes a CN equal to 80 for the proposed Mini- Storage parcel. Any modeling and/or proposed design should demonstrate that a CN equal to 80 is not exceeded. Infiltration will also be required for the proposed project. RATE CALCULATIONS: The storm water runoff and calculations of this report are based on Nationwide Urban Runoff Program (NURP) and the Soil Conservation Service Synthetic Unit Hydrograph Method incorporated into the software program HydroCad 10.0. Rainfall precipitation depths used in calculations are current NOAA Atlas 14 Point Precipitation Frequency Estimates for Monticello, Minnesota for the 2-Year (2.81-inch), 10-Year (4.18-inch) and 100-Year (6.93-inch) rainfall events. EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS: The existing site is vacant property that has been designated as industrial development property. Most of the existing site has grass turf coverage. Small areas of concrete pavement exist at various locations at the site remaining from previous industrial site activity. Existing storm water runoff for the site is primarily directed by natural topography to adjacent property to the east, small areas of runoff drains north to Dundas Road ditch, and a small area drains south to adjacent property. Existing Conditions Drainage Area Map and associated HydroCAD Analysis calculation model printouts can be found in attached Appendix A. The flow rates from the existing site are summarized in the table below: Spaeth Industrial Park, Monticello, MN Drainage Analysis Page 4 EXISTING FLOW RATES DISCHARGING OFFSITE 2-Year (2.81”) Runoff Rate (cfs) 10-Year (4.18”) Runoff Rate (cfs) 100-Year (6.93”) Runoff Rate (cfs) TOTAL EXISTING CONDITION 0.03 0.61 6.59 PROPOSED SITE CONDITIONS: The site is proposed to be improved with multiple buildings, pavement, utilities, and associated site improvements. Storm water improvements for the project are needed to limit rate control to Existing Conditions discharge rates, and provide volume control for water quality requirements. The project proposes collection of impervious surface drainage with storm sewer configured to function as an underground infiltration system. A surface infiltration basin is provided at the south end of the development and is connected to the storm sewer system. The infiltration basin provides additional storm water storage volume and additional system infiltration capacity. Storm water overflow is routed to Dundas Road ditch at the north east corner of the site. Proposed Conditions Drainage Area Map and associated HydroCAD Analysis calculation model printouts can be found in attached Appendix B. The flow rates from the proposed site are summarized in the table below: PROPOSED FLOW RATES DISCHARGING OFFSITE 2-Year (2.81”) Runoff Rate (cfs) 10-Year (4.18”) Runoff Rate (cfs) 100-Year (6.93”) Runoff Rate (cfs) Total Proposed Conditions 0.04 0.12 4.03 VOLUME ABSTRACTION AND WATER QUALITY CALCULATIONS: Volume abstraction is required to be provided for 1.1” rainfall on new impervious surface. Storm water system improvements are to incorporate infiltration ability with volume and capacity necessary to satisfy this requirement. The existing site impervious surface is 2,822 sf. The proposed site impervious surface is 150,032 sf. The resulting net impervious surface increase is then 150,032 – 2,822 = 147,210 sf. The project proposes collection of storm water runoff into a storm sewer system with perforated pipe and an outlet control structure with an elevated discharge outlet pipe. The elevated discharge outlet pipe provides containment of storm water volume within the system and allows infiltration of storm water into natural granular soils at the site. Pretreatment of storm water runoff within the system is provided by sumps incorporated into catch basins that collect runoff into the system. Infiltration Worksheet and Stage-Storage containment volume data printouts can be found in Attached Appendix C. The following table summarizes the calculation of required and proposed infiltration volumes: Spaeth Industrial Park, Monticello, MN Drainage Analysis Page 5 Since abstraction of 1.1” rainfall on new impervious surface is achieved, City of Monticello standards for water quality are also achieved. SOILS DATA: Soils in the project area are understood to be hydrologic Group A soil based on available soil data provided web soil survey for the project site. Type A soils at the site allow for an infiltration rate of 0.8 in/hr allowed by the MPCA Minnesota Storm Water Manual. Soils data for the site as obtained to date can be found in attached Appendix D. SUMMARY: The calculations show that the proposed design provides reduced stormwater runoff flow rates, achieves required volume control, and required water quality control for the proposed condition. The project improvements and drainage analysis satisfy the City of Monticello requirements for storm water management. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. 05/08/2017 ______________________ ______________ Scott Dahlke, P.E. Date Reg. No. 24348 VOLUME ABSTRACTION 1.1” INFILTRATION Item New Impervious Surface Area (sf) 1.1” Runoff Volume Required (cf) 48 hr Infiltration Volume Capacity (cf) System Storage Volume Below Outlet (cf) Underground Infiltration System 147,210 13,494 45,523 35,993 Spaeth Industrial Park, Monticello, MN Drainage Analysis APPENDIX A Existing Conditions Drainage Calculations CIVIL ENGINEERINGSITE DESIGNDRAINAGE AREA S1 = 177,278 sf = 4.07 acDRAINAGE AREA S3 = 11,215 sf = 0.26 acDRAINAGE AREA S2 = 113,928 sf = 2.62 acDRAINAGE AREA S4 = 3,336 sf = 0.08 ac S1 Ex Cond Onsite Draining East S2 Ex Cond Offsite Draining East to Area S1 S3 Ex Cond Onsite Draining North S4 Ex Cond Onsite Draining South 1R Total Project Routing Diagram for 00633 Ex Cond Prepared by Hewlett-Packard, Printed 4/18/2017 HydroCAD® 10.00-18 s/n 01607 © 2016 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Subcat Reach Pond Link Spaeth Industrial Park, Monticello, MN MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.81"00633 Ex Cond Printed 4/18/2017Prepared by Hewlett-Packard Page 2HydroCAD® 10.00-18 s/n 01607 © 2016 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment S1: Ex Cond Onsite Draining East Runoff = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf, Depth= 0.00" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.81" Area (sf) CN Description * 2,822 98 Impervious, HSG A * 174,456 39 Pervious, HSG A 177,278 40 Weighted Average 174,456 98.41% Pervious Area 2,822 1.59% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, User Defined Summary for Subcatchment S2: Ex Cond Offsite Draining East to Area S1 Runoff = 0.03 cfs @ 13.36 hrs, Volume= 576 cf, Depth= 0.06" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.81" Area (sf) CN Description * 20,886 98 Impervious, HSG A * 93,042 39 Pervious, HSG A 113,928 50 Weighted Average 93,042 81.67% Pervious Area 20,886 18.33% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, User Defined Summary for Subcatchment S3: Ex Cond Onsite Draining North Runoff = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf, Depth= 0.00" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.81" Area (sf) CN Description * 0 98 Impervious, HSG A * 11,215 39 Pervious, HSG A 11,215 39 Weighted Average 11,215 100.00% Pervious Area Spaeth Industrial Park, Monticello, MN MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.81"00633 Ex Cond Printed 4/18/2017Prepared by Hewlett-Packard Page 3HydroCAD® 10.00-18 s/n 01607 © 2016 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, User Defined Summary for Subcatchment S4: Ex Cond Onsite Draining South Runoff = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf, Depth= 0.00" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.81" Area (sf) CN Description * 0 98 Impervious, HSG A * 3,336 39 Pervious, HSG A 3,336 39 Weighted Average 3,336 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, User Defined Summary for Reach 1R: Total Project Inflow Area = 305,757 sf, 7.75% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.02" for 2-Year event Inflow = 0.03 cfs @ 13.36 hrs, Volume= 576 cf Outflow = 0.03 cfs @ 13.36 hrs, Volume= 576 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Spaeth Industrial Park, Monticello, MN MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.18"00633 Ex Cond Printed 4/18/2017Prepared by Hewlett-Packard Page 4HydroCAD® 10.00-18 s/n 01607 © 2016 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment S1: Ex Cond Onsite Draining East Runoff = 0.07 cfs @ 13.38 hrs, Volume= 1,271 cf, Depth= 0.09" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.18" Area (sf) CN Description * 2,822 98 Impervious, HSG A * 174,456 39 Pervious, HSG A 177,278 40 Weighted Average 174,456 98.41% Pervious Area 2,822 1.59% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, User Defined Summary for Subcatchment S2: Ex Cond Offsite Draining East to Area S1 Runoff = 0.61 cfs @ 12.43 hrs, Volume= 3,704 cf, Depth= 0.39" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.18" Area (sf) CN Description * 20,886 98 Impervious, HSG A * 93,042 39 Pervious, HSG A 113,928 50 Weighted Average 93,042 81.67% Pervious Area 20,886 18.33% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, User Defined Summary for Subcatchment S3: Ex Cond Onsite Draining North Runoff = 0.00 cfs @ 13.26 hrs, Volume= 62 cf, Depth= 0.07" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.18" Area (sf) CN Description * 0 98 Impervious, HSG A * 11,215 39 Pervious, HSG A 11,215 39 Weighted Average 11,215 100.00% Pervious Area Spaeth Industrial Park, Monticello, MN MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.18"00633 Ex Cond Printed 4/18/2017Prepared by Hewlett-Packard Page 5HydroCAD® 10.00-18 s/n 01607 © 2016 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, User Defined Summary for Subcatchment S4: Ex Cond Onsite Draining South Runoff = 0.00 cfs @ 13.26 hrs, Volume= 18 cf, Depth= 0.07" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.18" Area (sf) CN Description * 0 98 Impervious, HSG A * 3,336 39 Pervious, HSG A 3,336 39 Weighted Average 3,336 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, User Defined Summary for Reach 1R: Total Project Inflow Area = 305,757 sf, 7.75% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.20" for 10-Year event Inflow = 0.61 cfs @ 12.43 hrs, Volume= 5,056 cf Outflow = 0.61 cfs @ 12.43 hrs, Volume= 5,056 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Spaeth Industrial Park, Monticello, MN MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=6.93"00633 Ex Cond Printed 4/18/2017Prepared by Hewlett-Packard Page 6HydroCAD® 10.00-18 s/n 01607 © 2016 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment S1: Ex Cond Onsite Draining East Runoff = 2.34 cfs @ 12.39 hrs, Volume= 12,053 cf, Depth= 0.82" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=6.93" Area (sf) CN Description * 2,822 98 Impervious, HSG A * 174,456 39 Pervious, HSG A 177,278 40 Weighted Average 174,456 98.41% Pervious Area 2,822 1.59% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, User Defined Summary for Subcatchment S2: Ex Cond Offsite Draining East to Area S1 Runoff = 4.19 cfs @ 12.33 hrs, Volume= 15,456 cf, Depth= 1.63" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=6.93" Area (sf) CN Description * 20,886 98 Impervious, HSG A * 93,042 39 Pervious, HSG A 113,928 50 Weighted Average 93,042 81.67% Pervious Area 20,886 18.33% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, User Defined Summary for Subcatchment S3: Ex Cond Onsite Draining North Runoff = 0.23 cfs @ 12.15 hrs, Volume= 695 cf, Depth= 0.74" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=6.93" Area (sf) CN Description * 0 98 Impervious, HSG A * 11,215 39 Pervious, HSG A 11,215 39 Weighted Average 11,215 100.00% Pervious Area Spaeth Industrial Park, Monticello, MN MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=6.93"00633 Ex Cond Printed 4/18/2017Prepared by Hewlett-Packard Page 7HydroCAD® 10.00-18 s/n 01607 © 2016 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, User Defined Summary for Subcatchment S4: Ex Cond Onsite Draining South Runoff = 0.07 cfs @ 12.15 hrs, Volume= 207 cf, Depth= 0.74" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=6.93" Area (sf) CN Description * 0 98 Impervious, HSG A * 3,336 39 Pervious, HSG A 3,336 39 Weighted Average 3,336 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, User Defined Summary for Reach 1R: Total Project Inflow Area = 305,757 sf, 7.75% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.12" for 100-Year event Inflow = 6.59 cfs @ 12.35 hrs, Volume= 28,410 cf Outflow = 6.59 cfs @ 12.35 hrs, Volume= 28,410 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Spaeth Industrial Park, Monticello, MN Drainage Analysis APPENDIX B Proposed Conditions Drainage Calculations CIVIL ENGINEERINGSITE DESIGNDRAINAGE AREA S1 = 185,107 sf = 4.25 acDRAINAGE AREA S3 = 2,265 sf = 0.05 acDRAINAGE AREA S2 = 113,928 sf = 2.62 acDRAINAGE AREA S4 = 1,517 sf = 0.03 acDRAINAGE AREA S5 = 2,942 sf = 0.07 ac S1 Pro Cond Onsite to System S2 Ex Cond Offsite Draining East to Area S1 S3 Pro Cond Onsite Draining North S4 Pro Cond Onsite Draining South S5 Pro Cond Onsite Draining East 1R Total Project P1 Under Ground System and Basin Routing Diagram for 00633 Pro Cond Prepared by CESD HydroCAD® 10.00-18 s/n 01607 © 2016 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Subcat Reach Pond Link Spaeth Ind Park, Monticello, MN MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.81"00633 Pro Cond Prepared by CESD Page 2HydroCAD® 10.00-18 s/n 01607 © 2016 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment S1: Pro Cond Onsite to System Runoff = 7.51 cfs @ 12.29 hrs, Volume= 24,285 cf, Depth= 1.57" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.81" Area (sf) CN Description * 148,981 98 Impervious, HSG A * 29,704 39 Pervious, >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 6,422 49 50-75% Grass cover, Fair, HSG A 185,107 87 Weighted Average 36,126 19.52% Pervious Area 148,981 80.48% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, User Defined Summary for Subcatchment S2: Ex Cond Offsite Draining East to Area S1 Runoff = 0.03 cfs @ 13.36 hrs, Volume=576 cf, Depth= 0.06" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.81" Area (sf) CN Description * 20,886 98 Impervious, HSG A * 93,042 39 Pervious, HSG A 113,928 50 Weighted Average 93,042 81.67% Pervious Area 20,886 18.33% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, User Defined Summary for Subcatchment S3: Pro Cond Onsite Draining North Runoff = 0.04 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume=86 cf, Depth= 0.46" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.81" Spaeth Ind Park, Monticello, MN MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.81"00633 Pro Cond Prepared by CESD Page 3HydroCAD® 10.00-18 s/n 01607 © 2016 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Area (sf) CN Description * 1,052 98 Impervious, HSG A * 1,213 39 Pervious, >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 2,265 66 Weighted Average 1,213 53.55% Pervious Area 1,052 46.45% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, User Defined Summary for Subcatchment S4: Pro Cond Onsite Draining South Runoff = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume=0 cf, Depth= 0.00" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.81" Area (sf) CN Description *0 98 Impervious, HSG A * 1,517 39 Pervious, >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 1,517 39 Weighted Average 1,517 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, User Defined Summary for Subcatchment S5: Pro Cond Onsite Draining East Runoff = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume=0 cf, Depth= 0.00" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.81" Area (sf) CN Description *0 98 Impervious, HSG A * 2,942 39 Pervious, >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 2,942 39 Weighted Average 2,942 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, User Defined Spaeth Ind Park, Monticello, MN MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.81"00633 Pro Cond Prepared by CESD Page 4HydroCAD® 10.00-18 s/n 01607 © 2016 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Reach 1R: Total Project Inflow Area = 305,759 sf, 55.90% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.00" for 2-Year event Inflow = 0.04 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 86 cf Outflow = 0.04 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 86 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Summary for Pond P1: Under Ground System and Basin Inflow Area = 299,035 sf, 56.81% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.00" for 2-Year event Inflow = 7.51 cfs @ 12.29 hrs, Volume= 24,861 cf Outflow = 0.42 cfs @ 14.02 hrs, Volume= 24,861 cf, Atten= 94%, Lag= 103.9 min Discarded = 0.42 cfs @ 14.02 hrs, Volume= 24,861 cf Primary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 957.82' @ 14.02 hrs Surf.Area= 22,730 sf Storage= 15,465 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 408.1 min calculated for 24,858 cf (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 408.1 min ( 1,227.0 - 818.8 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 956.00' 13,966 cf 4.00'W x 1,951.00'L x 3.00'H Underground System Rock Encasement Z= 41,043 cf Overall - 6,129 cf Embedded = 34,914 cf x 40.0% Voids #2 959.00' 7,613 cf 12.00'W x 1,951.00'L x 1.00'H Sand over Rock Encasement Z=1.0 25,376 cf Overall x 30.0% Voids #3 957.00' 6,129 cf 24.0" Round Pipe Storage Inside #1 L= 1,951.0' #4 957.00' 39,081 cf Infiltration Basin (Conic) Listed below (Recalc) 66,788 cf Total Available Storage Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) (sq-ft) 957.00 6,422 0 0 6,422 958.00 8,142 7,265 7,265 8,168 959.00 9,133 8,633 15,898 9,213 960.00 11,796 10,436 26,334 11,900 961.00 13,722 12,747 39,081 13,867 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Discarded 956.00'0.800 in/hr Exfiltration over Horizontal area #2 Primary 959.00'15.0" Round Pipe Outlet L= 18.0' RCP, end-section conforming to fill, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 959.00' / 958.70' S= 0.0167 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.012 Concrete pipe, finished, Flow Area= 1.23 sf Spaeth Ind Park, Monticello, MN MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.81"00633 Pro Cond Prepared by CESD Page 5HydroCAD® 10.00-18 s/n 01607 © 2016 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Discarded OutFlow Max=0.42 cfs @ 14.02 hrs HW=957.82' (Free Discharge) 1=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.42 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=956.00' (Free Discharge) 2=Pipe Outlet ( Controls 0.00 cfs) Spaeth Ind Park, Monticello, MN MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.18"00633 Pro Cond Prepared by CESD Page 6HydroCAD® 10.00-18 s/n 01607 © 2016 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment S1: Pro Cond Onsite to System Runoff = 13.25 cfs @ 12.29 hrs, Volume= 43,227 cf, Depth= 2.80" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.18" Area (sf) CN Description * 148,981 98 Impervious, HSG A * 29,704 39 Pervious, >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 6,422 49 50-75% Grass cover, Fair, HSG A 185,107 87 Weighted Average 36,126 19.52% Pervious Area 148,981 80.48% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, User Defined Summary for Subcatchment S2: Ex Cond Offsite Draining East to Area S1 Runoff = 0.61 cfs @ 12.42 hrs, Volume= 3,704 cf, Depth= 0.39" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.18" Area (sf) CN Description * 20,886 98 Impervious, HSG A * 93,042 39 Pervious, HSG A 113,928 50 Weighted Average 93,042 81.67% Pervious Area 20,886 18.33% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, User Defined Summary for Subcatchment S3: Pro Cond Onsite Draining North Runoff = 0.12 cfs @ 12.13 hrs, Volume=226 cf, Depth= 1.20" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.18" Spaeth Ind Park, Monticello, MN MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.18"00633 Pro Cond Prepared by CESD Page 7HydroCAD® 10.00-18 s/n 01607 © 2016 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Area (sf) CN Description * 1,052 98 Impervious, HSG A * 1,213 39 Pervious, >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 2,265 66 Weighted Average 1,213 53.55% Pervious Area 1,052 46.45% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, User Defined Summary for Subcatchment S4: Pro Cond Onsite Draining South Runoff = 0.00 cfs @ 13.24 hrs, Volume=8 cf, Depth= 0.07" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.18" Area (sf) CN Description *0 98 Impervious, HSG A * 1,517 39 Pervious, >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 1,517 39 Weighted Average 1,517 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, User Defined Summary for Subcatchment S5: Pro Cond Onsite Draining East Runoff = 0.00 cfs @ 13.24 hrs, Volume=16 cf, Depth= 0.07" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.18" Area (sf) CN Description *0 98 Impervious, HSG A * 2,942 39 Pervious, >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 2,942 39 Weighted Average 2,942 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, User Defined Spaeth Ind Park, Monticello, MN MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.18"00633 Pro Cond Prepared by CESD Page 8HydroCAD® 10.00-18 s/n 01607 © 2016 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Reach 1R: Total Project Inflow Area = 305,759 sf, 55.90% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.01" for 10-Year event Inflow = 0.12 cfs @ 12.13 hrs, Volume= 250 cf Outflow = 0.12 cfs @ 12.13 hrs, Volume= 250 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Summary for Pond P1: Under Ground System and Basin Inflow Area = 299,035 sf, 56.81% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.88" for 10-Year event Inflow = 13.69 cfs @ 12.29 hrs, Volume= 46,931 cf Outflow = 0.51 cfs @ 15.28 hrs, Volume= 46,931 cf, Atten= 96%, Lag= 179.3 min Discarded = 0.51 cfs @ 15.28 hrs, Volume= 46,931 cf Primary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 958.79' @ 15.28 hrs Surf.Area= 27,657 sf Storage= 32,257 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 692.3 min calculated for 46,931 cf (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 692.3 min ( 1,503.1 - 810.8 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 956.00' 13,966 cf 4.00'W x 1,951.00'L x 3.00'H Underground System Rock Encasement Z= 41,043 cf Overall - 6,129 cf Embedded = 34,914 cf x 40.0% Voids #2 959.00' 7,613 cf 12.00'W x 1,951.00'L x 1.00'H Sand over Rock Encasement Z=1.0 25,376 cf Overall x 30.0% Voids #3 957.00' 6,129 cf 24.0" Round Pipe Storage Inside #1 L= 1,951.0' #4 957.00' 39,081 cf Infiltration Basin (Conic) Listed below (Recalc) 66,788 cf Total Available Storage Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) (sq-ft) 957.00 6,422 0 0 6,422 958.00 8,142 7,265 7,265 8,168 959.00 9,133 8,633 15,898 9,213 960.00 11,796 10,436 26,334 11,900 961.00 13,722 12,747 39,081 13,867 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Discarded 956.00'0.800 in/hr Exfiltration over Horizontal area #2 Primary 959.00'15.0" Round Pipe Outlet L= 18.0' RCP, end-section conforming to fill, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 959.00' / 958.70' S= 0.0167 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.012 Concrete pipe, finished, Flow Area= 1.23 sf Spaeth Ind Park, Monticello, MN MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.18"00633 Pro Cond Prepared by CESD Page 9HydroCAD® 10.00-18 s/n 01607 © 2016 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Discarded OutFlow Max=0.51 cfs @ 15.28 hrs HW=958.79' (Free Discharge) 1=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.51 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=956.00' (Free Discharge) 2=Pipe Outlet ( Controls 0.00 cfs) Spaeth Ind Park, Monticello, MN MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=6.93"00633 Pro Cond Prepared by CESD Page 10HydroCAD® 10.00-18 s/n 01607 © 2016 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment S1: Pro Cond Onsite to System Runoff = 24.92 cfs @ 12.29 hrs, Volume= 83,478 cf, Depth= 5.41" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=6.93" Area (sf) CN Description * 148,981 98 Impervious, HSG A * 29,704 39 Pervious, >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 6,422 49 50-75% Grass cover, Fair, HSG A 185,107 87 Weighted Average 36,126 19.52% Pervious Area 148,981 80.48% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, User Defined Summary for Subcatchment S2: Ex Cond Offsite Draining East to Area S1 Runoff = 4.21 cfs @ 12.33 hrs, Volume= 15,456 cf, Depth= 1.63" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=6.93" Area (sf) CN Description * 20,886 98 Impervious, HSG A * 93,042 39 Pervious, HSG A 113,928 50 Weighted Average 93,042 81.67% Pervious Area 20,886 18.33% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, User Defined Summary for Subcatchment S3: Pro Cond Onsite Draining North Runoff = 0.32 cfs @ 12.13 hrs, Volume=594 cf, Depth= 3.15" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=6.93" Spaeth Ind Park, Monticello, MN MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=6.93"00633 Pro Cond Prepared by CESD Page 11HydroCAD® 10.00-18 s/n 01607 © 2016 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Area (sf) CN Description * 1,052 98 Impervious, HSG A * 1,213 39 Pervious, >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 2,265 66 Weighted Average 1,213 53.55% Pervious Area 1,052 46.45% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, User Defined Summary for Subcatchment S4: Pro Cond Onsite Draining South Runoff = 0.03 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume=94 cf, Depth= 0.74" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=6.93" Area (sf) CN Description *0 98 Impervious, HSG A * 1,517 39 Pervious, >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 1,517 39 Weighted Average 1,517 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, User Defined Summary for Subcatchment S5: Pro Cond Onsite Draining East Runoff = 0.06 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume=182 cf, Depth= 0.74" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=6.93" Area (sf) CN Description *0 98 Impervious, HSG A * 2,942 39 Pervious, >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 2,942 39 Weighted Average 2,942 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, User Defined Spaeth Ind Park, Monticello, MN MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=6.93"00633 Pro Cond Prepared by CESD Page 12HydroCAD® 10.00-18 s/n 01607 © 2016 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Reach 1R: Total Project Inflow Area = 305,759 sf, 55.90% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.17" for 100-Year event Inflow = 4.03 cfs @ 12.94 hrs, Volume= 29,857 cf Outflow = 4.03 cfs @ 12.94 hrs, Volume= 29,857 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Summary for Pond P1: Under Ground System and Basin Inflow Area = 299,035 sf, 56.81% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.97" for 100-Year event Inflow = 28.99 cfs @ 12.29 hrs, Volume= 98,934 cf Outflow = 5.08 cfs @ 12.94 hrs, Volume= 98,934 cf, Atten= 82%, Lag= 39.0 min Discarded = 1.09 cfs @ 12.94 hrs, Volume= 69,947 cf Primary = 3.99 cfs @ 12.94 hrs, Volume= 28,987 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 960.12' @ 12.94 hrs Surf.Area= 58,925 sf Storage= 55,432 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 482.5 min calculated for 98,920 cf (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 482.7 min ( 1,282.8 - 800.2 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 956.00' 13,966 cf 4.00'W x 1,951.00'L x 3.00'H Underground System Rock Encasement Z= 41,043 cf Overall - 6,129 cf Embedded = 34,914 cf x 40.0% Voids #2 959.00' 7,613 cf 12.00'W x 1,951.00'L x 1.00'H Sand over Rock Encasement Z=1.0 25,376 cf Overall x 30.0% Voids #3 957.00' 6,129 cf 24.0" Round Pipe Storage Inside #1 L= 1,951.0' #4 957.00' 39,081 cf Infiltration Basin (Conic) Listed below (Recalc) 66,788 cf Total Available Storage Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) (sq-ft) 957.00 6,422 0 0 6,422 958.00 8,142 7,265 7,265 8,168 959.00 9,133 8,633 15,898 9,213 960.00 11,796 10,436 26,334 11,900 961.00 13,722 12,747 39,081 13,867 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Discarded 956.00'0.800 in/hr Exfiltration over Horizontal area #2 Primary 959.00'15.0" Round Pipe Outlet L= 18.0' RCP, end-section conforming to fill, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 959.00' / 958.70' S= 0.0167 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.012 Concrete pipe, finished, Flow Area= 1.23 sf Spaeth Ind Park, Monticello, MN MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=6.93"00633 Pro Cond Prepared by CESD Page 13HydroCAD® 10.00-18 s/n 01607 © 2016 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Discarded OutFlow Max=1.09 cfs @ 12.94 hrs HW=960.12' (Free Discharge) 1=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 1.09 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=3.99 cfs @ 12.94 hrs HW=960.12' (Free Discharge) 2=Pipe Outlet (Barrel Controls 3.99 cfs @ 4.56 fps) Spaeth Industrial Park, Monticello, MN Drainage Analysis APPENDIX C Volume Abstraction 1.0” Rainfall on New Impervious Surface and Stage-Storage Containment Volume Data SPAETH INDUSTRIAL PARK, MONTICELLO, MN INFILTRATION WORKSHEET Requirements: Infiltrate runoff generated from a 1.1” rainfall over the applicable new impervious surface within 48 hours. Step 1: Determine areas of impervious surfaces area and effective infiltration. New impervious surface area = 150,032 sf removed existing impervious surface = 2,822 sf Net increase impervious surface = 150,032 - 2,822 = 147,210 sf Effective Infiltration Area = Underground System + Infiltration Basin Underground System = 1,951 lf x 4 ft = 7,804 sf Infiltration Basin = 6,422 sf at bottom contour 957 elevation Total = 7,804 + 6,422 = 14,226 sf Step 2: Calculate runoff volume from increase impervious surface generated by 1.1” storm. 147,210 sf x 1.0 x 1.1 inch x 1ft/12inch = 13,494 cf Net Increased Coefficient Rainfall Volume Impervious Required to be Surface Area Infiltrated Step 3: Calculate volume capacity of being infiltrated on site in 48 hours. Use infiltration rate for Type A soils = 0.80 in/hr. 14,226 sf x 0.80 in/hr x 48 hrs x 1ft/12inch = 45,523 cf Effective Infiltration Volume Infiltration Rate Capacity Area in 48 Hours Step 4: Compare volume capacity to volume required to be infiltrated. 45,523 cf > 13,494 cf Volume Volume Capacity Required to be in 48 Hours Infiltrated MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=6.93"00633 Pro Cond Printed 4/30/2017Prepared by Hewlett-Packard HydroCAD® 10.00-18 s/n 01607 © 2016 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Stage-Area-Storage for Pond P1: Under Ground System and Basin Elevation (feet) Horizontal (sq-ft) Storage (cubic-feet) 956.00 7,804 0 956.05 8,000 158 956.10 8,195 320 956.15 8,391 486 956.20 8,586 656 956.25 8,782 829 956.30 8,977 1,007 956.35 9,173 1,188 956.40 9,369 1,374 956.45 9,564 1,563 956.50 9,760 1,756 956.55 9,956 1,954 956.60 10,151 2,155 956.65 10,347 2,360 956.70 10,543 2,568 956.75 10,739 2,781 956.80 10,935 2,998 956.85 11,130 3,219 956.90 11,326 3,443 956.95 11,522 3,672 957.00 18,140 3,904 957.05 18,417 4,488 957.10 18,695 5,100 957.15 18,973 5,732 957.20 19,251 6,381 957.25 19,531 7,047 957.30 19,810 7,727 957.35 20,091 8,421 957.40 20,371 9,128 957.45 20,653 9,848 957.50 20,935 10,580 957.55 21,217 11,324 957.60 21,500 12,078 957.65 21,783 12,844 957.70 22,067 13,620 957.75 22,352 14,406 957.80 22,637 15,202 957.85 22,922 16,008 957.90 23,208 16,823 957.95 23,495 17,647 958.00 23,782 18,479 958.05 24,027 19,319 958.10 24,271 20,165 958.15 24,516 21,017 958.20 24,761 21,875 958.25 25,006 22,737 958.30 25,251 23,605 958.35 25,497 24,476 958.40 25,743 25,353 958.45 25,988 26,233 958.50 26,234 27,116 958.55 26,481 28,002 Elevation (feet) Horizontal (sq-ft) Storage (cubic-feet) 958.60 26,727 28,891 958.65 26,973 29,782 958.70 27,220 30,675 958.75 27,467 31,568 958.80 27,714 32,461 958.85 27,961 33,352 958.90 28,208 34,241 958.95 28,455 35,123 959.00 52,115 35,993 959.05 52,436 36,805 959.10 52,759 37,627 959.15 53,082 38,457 959.20 53,406 39,298 959.25 53,731 40,147 959.30 54,056 41,006 959.35 54,383 41,875 959.40 54,710 42,752 959.45 55,039 43,640 959.50 55,368 44,537 959.55 55,698 45,443 959.60 56,029 46,360 959.65 56,361 47,285 959.70 56,694 48,221 959.75 57,027 49,166 959.80 57,362 50,122 959.85 57,697 51,087 959.90 58,033 52,062 959.95 58,370 53,047 960.00 58,708 54,042 960.05 58,801 54,634 960.10 58,894 55,230 960.15 58,988 55,832 960.20 59,082 56,438 960.25 59,176 57,049 960.30 59,271 57,664 960.35 59,366 58,285 960.40 59,461 58,910 960.45 59,557 59,540 960.50 59,653 60,174 960.55 59,749 60,814 960.60 59,846 61,458 960.65 59,943 62,107 960.70 60,041 62,761 960.75 60,139 63,420 960.80 60,237 64,084 960.85 60,336 64,753 960.90 60,435 65,426 960.95 60,534 66,105 961.00 60,634 66,788 Spaeth Industrial Park, Monticello, MN Drainage Analysis APPENDIX D Soils Data Soil Map—Wright County, Minnesota Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 4/24/2017 Page 1 of 350152905015320501535050153805015410501544050154705015500501553050152905015320501535050153805015410501544050154705015500437680437710437740437770437800437830 437650 437680 437710 437740 437770 437800 437830 45° 17' 25'' N 93° 47' 42'' W45° 17' 25'' N93° 47' 33'' W45° 17' 17'' N 93° 47' 42'' W45° 17' 17'' N 93° 47' 33'' WN Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 15N WGS84 0 50 100 200 300 Feet 0 15 30 60 90 Meters Map Scale: 1:1,210 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Map Unit Polygons Soil Map Unit Lines Soil Map Unit Points Special Point Features Blowout Borrow Pit Clay Spot Closed Depression Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot Landfill Lava Flow Marsh or swamp Mine or Quarry Miscellaneous Water Perennial Water Rock Outcrop Saline Spot Sandy Spot Severely Eroded Spot Sinkhole Slide or Slip Sodic Spot Spoil Area Stony Spot Very Stony Spot Wet Spot Other Special Line Features Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:12,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Wright County, Minnesota Survey Area Data: Version 10, Sep 19, 2016 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Mar 16, 2012—Apr 6, 2012 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Soil Map—Wright County, Minnesota Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 4/24/2017 Page 2 of 3 Map Unit Legend Wright County, Minnesota (MN171) Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 406 Dorset sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes 5.5 100.0% Totals for Area of Interest 5.5 100.0% Soil Map—Wright County, Minnesota Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 4/24/2017 Page 3 of 3 Engineering Properties (MN) This table gives the engineering classifications and the range of engineering properties for the layers of each soil in the survey area. Hydrologic group is a group of soils having similar runoff potential under similar storm and cover conditions. Soil properties that influence runoff potential are those that influence the minimum rate of infiltration for a bare soil after prolonged wetting and when not frozen. These properties are depth to a seasonal high water table, saturated hydraulic conductivity after prolonged wetting, and depth to a layer with a very slow water transmission rate. Changes in soil properties caused by land management or climate changes also cause the hydrologic soil group to change. The influence of ground cover is treated independently. There are four hydrologic soil groups, A, B, C, and D, and three dual groups, A/D, B/D, and C/D. In the dual groups, the first letter is for drained areas and the second letter is for undrained areas. The four hydrologic soil groups are described in the following paragraphs: Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. Depth to the upper and lower boundaries of each layer is indicated. Texture is given in the standard terms used by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. These terms are defined according to percentages of sand, silt, and clay in the fraction of the soil that is less than 2 millimeters in diameter. "Loam," for example, is soil that is 7 to 27 percent clay, 28 to 50 percent silt, and less than 52 percent sand. If the content of particles coarser than sand is 15 percent or more, an appropriate modifier is added, for example, "gravelly." Classification of the soils is determined according to the Unified soil classification system (ASTM, 2005) and the system adopted by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO, 2004). Engineering Properties (MN)---Wright County, Minnesota Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 4/24/2017 Page 1 of 3 The Unified system classifies soils according to properties that affect their use as construction material. Soils are classified according to particle-size distribution of the fraction less than 3 inches in diameter and according to plasticity index, liquid limit, and organic matter content. Sandy and gravelly soils are identified as GW, GP, GM, GC, SW, SP, SM, and SC; silty and clayey soils as ML, CL, OL, MH, CH, and OH; and highly organic soils as PT. Soils exhibiting engineering properties of two groups can have a dual classification, for example, CL-ML. The AASHTO system classifies soils according to those properties that affect roadway construction and maintenance. In this system, the fraction of a mineral soil that is less than 3 inches in diameter is classified in one of seven groups from A-1 through A-7 on the basis of particle-size distribution, liquid limit, and plasticity index. Soils in group A-1 are coarse grained and low in content of fines (silt and clay). At the other extreme, soils in group A-7 are fine grained. Highly organic soils are classified in group A-8 on the basis of visual inspection. If laboratory data are available, the A-1, A-2, and A-7 groups are further classified as A-1-a, A-1-b, A-2-4, A-2-5, A-2-6, A-2-7, A-7-5, or A-7-6. As an additional refinement, the suitability of a soil as subgrade material can be indicated by a group index number. Group index numbers range from 0 for the best subgrade material to 20 or higher for the poorest. Rock fragments larger than 10 inches in diameter and 3 to 10 inches in diameter are indicated as a percentage of the total soil on a dry-weight basis. The percentages are estimates determined mainly by converting volume percentage in the field to weight percentage. Percentage (of soil particles) passing designated sieves is the percentage of the soil fraction less than 3 inches in diameter based on an ovendry weight. The sieves, numbers 4, 10, 40, and 200 (USA Standard Series), have openings of 4.76, 2.00, 0.420, and 0.074 millimeters, respectively. Estimates are based on laboratory tests of soils sampled in the survey area and in nearby areas and on estimates made in the field. Liquid limit and plasticity index (Atterberg limits) indicate the plasticity characteristics of a soil. The estimates are based on test data from the survey area or from nearby areas and on field examination. References: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00. Engineering Properties (MN)---Wright County, Minnesota Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 4/24/2017 Page 2 of 3 Report—Engineering Properties (MN) Engineering Properties (MN)–Wright County, Minnesota Map unit symbol and soil name Pct. of map unit Hydrolo gic group Depth USDA texture Classification Fragments Percentage passing sieve number—Liquid limit Plasticit y index Unified AASHTO >10 inches 3-10 inches 4 10 40 200 In Pct Pct Pct 406—Dorset sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes Dorset 80 B 0-11 Sandy loam, fine sandy loam, loam SC-SM, SC A-2, A-4 0 0 90-100 78-100 57-88 27-50 0-31 NP-10 11-20 Loam, sandy loam, coarse sandy loam SC-SM A-6, A-2-4, A-4 0 0 91-100 79-100 54-83 24-45 0-31 NP-11 20-38 Gravelly coarse sand, gravelly sand, very gravelly coarse sand, gravelly loamy sand SW-SM A-1-b, A-1 0 0-2 79-92 54-77 24-41 5-15 0-0 NP 38-79 Gravelly coarse sand, gravelly sand, very gravelly coarse sand, gravelly loamy sand SW-SM A-1-b, A-1 0 0-2 80-93 56-78 24-42 5-15 0-0 NP Data Source Information Soil Survey Area: Wright County, Minnesota Survey Area Data: Version 10, Sep 19, 2016 Engineering Properties (MN)---Wright County, Minnesota Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 4/24/2017 Page 3 of 3 Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/17 1 2E. Public Hearing – Consideration of a request for Amendment to Planned Unit Development, Development Stage Planned Unit Development, and Preliminary Plat for Chelsea Corner for Office, Service, and Warehouse Uses in the Red Rooster Planned Unit Development. Applicant: Red Rooster Properties, Inc. (NAC) Property: Legal: Lot 1, Block 2 (with exceptions), Oakwood Industrial Park; PID 155018002012 Address: 100 Chelsea Road Planning Case Number: 2017-016 A. REFERENCE & BACKGROUND: Request(s): Request to subdivide an existing parcel with multiple buildings to accommodate a new user, and development of new buildings on newly subdivided parcel for commercial/industrial purposes, through an amendment to an existing Planned Unit Development. Deadline for Decision: July 10th, 2017 Land Use Designation: Places to Shop Zoning Designation: PUD, Planned Unit Development The purpose of the PUD, Planned Unit Development 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 process that results in a development outcome exceeding that which is typically achievable through the 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. Overlays/Environmental Regulations Applicable: NA Current Site Use: Commercial/Industrial buildings for storage and office uses. Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/17 2 Surrounding Land Uses: North: Commercial East: Industrial South: Industrial West: Vacant Commercial Project Description: The applicant is seeking approval of a subdivision to separate a portion of the existing development, with multiple buildings, to accommodate occupancy of a portion of the property by a new user, and development of new buildings for the applicant’s commercial/ industrial uses. Both sites would contain a combination of office and storage uses for separate businesses. ANALYSIS Background. The subject property received a Planned Unit Development zoning and approval in 2016 to accommodate the occupancy of the site by the current applicant. That PUD approval permitted the use of the site for office and storage uses by the applicant, as well as limited storage for certain civic organizations seeking temporary storage of equipment used in public events. The 2016 PUD approval accommodated the change in use (from a previous church ownership), and incorporated the then-current level of site improvements, which included fencing, landscaping, and a paved parking lot along the north portion of the site. As a former building materials sales yard, the bulk of the site surrounding the four remaining buildings on the site was unpaved. The proposed project would divide the site into two parcels along a north-south boundary between the westerly 3 buildings and the east portion of the site, which includes a portion of the paved parking, a large concrete pad location of a previous building, and one existing storage building in the southeast corner of the property. The westerly site would be sold to a user that would occupy the main building for office, shop, and storage purposes for an industrial service use. The other two existing buildings are proposed to be used for storage, essentially in their current condition, and for purposes similar to those approved in the 2016 PUD. The easterly site would be occupied by the applicant, and would include a new building in the northeast corner of the property, along with a new parking lot, a future ability to construct an additional accessory building on the empty concrete pad, and use of the existing building for storage. The two parcels would continue to share the current driveway access in common under a cross-parking and access agreement. Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/17 3 As noted above, the applicant would use the east parcel, including the new building, the future building, and the existing accessory buildings for the same uses previously approved for the entire parcel under the 2016 PUD. The conditions of that approval included the following: 1. Any expansion of self-storage activities in the PUD District beyond the limited accessory non-commercial self-storage identified in the PUD Site Plan and Narrative shall be subject to an amendment to Planned Unit Development and may require additional improvements, including, but not limited to, paving, curbing, stormwater, and screening. 2. No outdoor storage of materials or equipment shall be permitted in the PUD. 3. Paving and circulation on the site shall be subject to the review and comment of the City Engineer. 4. The applicant enter into a PUD and Development Agreement for the site specifying for the allowable uses and conditions. 5. Conditions recommended by other City staff or the Planning Commission. It is expected that these conditions would carry over to the current PUD project. With regard to new items and proposed improvements raised by the current proposal, staff makes the following observations and recommendations. Existing Building. The applicant is seeking approval for an Industrial Services use (building maintenance), with accessory office and storage uses within the existing building. Future Building. The applicant is seeking approval of both the first proposed building, and an additional future building to be located on the empty concrete pad, which had previously contained a separate building. No plans or details for the future building have been provided at this time. Staff is recommending that if the City chooses to approve both the proposed and future buildings with this PUD, that the future building approval includes conditions that would require the extension of paved circulation, adequate parking (also paved), building materials and design to be consistent with the existing building on Lot 1, approval of all stormwater and utility recommendations of the City Engineer, and compliance with all other zoning regulations. The future building use should be solely as accessory storage for the principal use in the proposed new building. Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/17 4 Landscaping. The existing and proposed landscaping is consistent with the City’s zoning regulations, based primarily on previous landscaping requirements imposed at the time of the church occupancy, and then the 2016 PUD. The applicant is proposing to add two deciduous trees to the front yard adjacent to Chelsea Road. Parking. The proposed building is approximately 4900 square feet gross in floor area, with a mix of office and, mostly, storage area. Estimating a maximum parking demand for a commercial/industrial user in such a building at 1 parking space per 350 square feet, would result in a parking requirement of 14 spaces for the new building. The proposed site plan shows 16 provided on the new parcel. The existing building contains approximately 7800 square feet gross floor area. The building will have a mix of office, shop, and storage space, and at the same ratio would require 22 spaces. At least 20 paved spaces are provided, which should suffice given internal net reductions for mechanical, restrooms, etc., and a shared access/parking arrangement with the adjacent parcel. Circulation. The applicant’s site plan shows the limits of paving area to be consistent with the existing fence line, which includes the front portion only of the new building. The new building includes both overhead and service door access behind the existing fence line, and as a condition of approval, paving should be extended to access doors for new building, so employees or others are not driving on unpaved surfaces for newly introduced uses. Signage. The existing sign will be utilized by the new owner on the west parcel, and small sign will be added for the new building. The proposed new sign is consistent with the requirements for a 15 foot setback for monument/freestanding signs. No other signage is proposed at this time. Any future signage to be added or replaced should meet the requirements of the City’s zoning regulations. Trash Handling. The plan anticipates that trash handling equipment will be stored inside the buildings. This would be consistent with the original PUD provisions that prohibit outdoor storage on the property. Building Design/Materials. The proposed building is similar in design and materials to the existing building; metal exterior with wood and masonry accents, as well as glass. While the primary exterior materials are not consistent with what the City typically expects of buildings that are in commercial areas, the site is zoned PUD, and adjoins both commercial and industrial property. As a transitional site, the City can consider the proposed materials to be consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed building is set back from the Chelsea Road right of way approximately 93 feet, and 22 feet from the side (east) property line. Lighting. The zoning ordinance requires that photometric lighting plan values do not exceed 1.0 foot-candles at the property line, in commercial and industrial areas. The submitted photometric plan shows values that are too high, but do not actually show Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/17 5 values at property line. The applicant should revise the photometric plan, and make the required adjustments in lighting fixtures, to meet the requirements of the code. In addition, it appears from the lighting detail that light pole height appears to be 28 feet. This detail should be revised to meet the code requirement maximum of 25 feet or less. Preliminary Plat. The applicants are seeking Preliminary Plat approval as a part of the PUD project, dividing the property along a north-south boundary into two lots, as noted above. The plat creates parcels of 1.79 acres (westerly Lot 1) and 1.88 acres (easterly Lot 2). Lot widths along Chelsea Road are approximately 160 feet for Lot 1, and 140.87 feet for Lot 2. As a PUD District, there are no specific lot area or width requirements that apply. For comparison purposes, the past B-2 District would have required 100 feet of lot width, but did not impose a minimum lot area. As noted in the PUD discussion above (and required by Exhibit Z), the City Engineer will comment on grading and utility aspects of the project. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Motion to adopt Resolution No. PC-2017- 011 recommending approval of a Preliminary Plat for Chelsea Corner and amendment to PUD for Development Stage Planned Unit Development for Red Rooster, based on the findings in said resolution, and incorporating the conditions listed in Exhibit Z of the staff report. 2. Motion to deny adoption of Resolution No. PC-2017 -011, based on findings to be stated at the public hearing. 3. Motion to table action on Resolution No. PC-2017 -011, subject to additional information as directed. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending approval of the Resolution, consistent with Alternative 1, with the conditions as noted in Exhibit Z. The property was originally developed as a lumber yard with multiple metal buildings, and has seen a series of changes to both the land use and zoning regulations, given its location at the transition between commercial and industrial areas. The PUD accommodates uses that have elements of both commercial and industrial activities, and the existing development would raise separate issues in attempting to convert the site to full compliance with commercial zoning regulations. As such, the transitional elements of the proposal appear to be consistent with its location, and with the approvals granted under the 2016 PUD. D. SUPPORTING DATA: A. Resolution PC-2017-011 B. Draft Ordinance 6XX, amending Red Rooster PUD C. Aerial Site Image Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/17 6 D. Applicant Narrative, including supplemental information E. Development Plans, including: a. Title Sheet b. Site Plan c. Grading & Erosion Control Plan d. Utility & Removals Plan e. Landscape Plan f. Details g. Photometric Plan h. Building Elevations i. Sign Plan F. Preliminary Plat, Chelsea Corner G. Drainage Calculations, Online Only H. City Engineer’s Letter, dated May 31, 2017 Z. Conditions of Approval Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/17 7 EXHIBIT Z Preliminary Plat of Chelsea Corner and Development Stage PUD Red Rooster Properties, Inc. 100 Chelsea Road Lot 1, Block 2, Oakwood Industrial Park 1. Any expansion of self-storage activities in the PUD District beyond the limited accessory non-commercial self-storage identified in the PUD Site Plan and Narrative, as approved in the PUD Zoning District, shall be subject to an amendment to Planned Unit Development and may require additional improvements, including, but not limited to, paving, curbing, stormwater, and screening. 2. No outdoor storage of materials or equipment or materials shall be permitted in the PUD. 3. The future building made a part of this PUD shall be consistent in materials, height, design, and color with the currently proposed building. 4. Paving shall be extended to the rear corner of the new office building at the time of construction; 5. Paving shall be further extended to the rear corner of the future storage building at the time of construction of said future building. 6. The applicant shall submit a site and full civil plan set showing the full set of existing, currently proposed, and future building and site improvements as a part of the record Final Stage PUD, including phasing of such buildings and improvements. 7. Lighting and lighting plans in the PUD shall be revised to be consistent with the requirements of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance. 8. Signage shall meet the requirements of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance. 9. Paving and circulation on the site shall be subject to the review and comment of the City Engineer. 10. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations of the City Engineer, per the letter dated May 31st, 2017. 11. The applicant enter into a PUD and Development Agreement for the site specifying for the allowable uses and conditions. The Development Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/17 8 Agreement shall be accompanied by recordable cross-access and parking agreements for the two parcels. 12. Conditions recommended by other City staff or the Planning Commission. CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2016-011 1 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT OF CHELSEA CORNER AND DEVELOPMENT STAGE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR RED ROOSTER PROPERTIES WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted a request to subdivide its property at 100 Chelsea Road, PID No. 155-018-002012 into two parcels; and WHEREAS, the applicant concurrently proposes to develop the property for business office and accessory storage and industrial service uses, in addition to principal storage for organizations with no other presence on the property; and WHEREAS, the site is guided for commercial uses under the label “Places to Shop” in the City’s Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the proposed PUD, along with the companion Plat, are consistent with the long-term use and development of the property for commercial uses; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 6, 2017 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 PUD provides an appropriate means of furthering the intent of the Comprehensive Plan for the site by putting the existing and proposed buildings to limited use. 2. The use of the site for storage for non-profit organizations is consistent with the City’s interest in promoting civic charity work and community pride. 3. The proposed improvements on the site under the Development Stage PUD are consistent with the needs of the PUD in this location as a transition between commercial and industrial areas. 4. The improvements will have expected impacts on public services, including sewer, water, stormwater treatment, and traffic which have been planned to serve the property for the development as proposed. 5. The PUD flexibility for the project, including modifying pavement requirements and storage uses, are consistent with the intent of the City’s economic development objectives, as well as with the intent of the PUD zoning regulations. CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2016-011 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota, that the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the Monticello City Council approves the Rezoning and Development Stage PUD, subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit Z as follows: 1. Any expansion of self-storage activities in the PUD District beyond the limited accessory non-commercial self-storage identified in the PUD Site Plan and Narrative, as approved in the PUD Zoning District, shall be subject to an amendment to Planned Unit Development and may require additional improvements, including, but not limited to, paving, curbing, stormwater, and screening. 2. No outdoor storage of materials or equipment or materials shall be permitted in the PUD. 3. The future building made a part of this PUD shall be consistent in materials, height, design, and color with the currently proposed building. 4. Paving shall be extended to the rear corner of the new office building at the time of construction; 5. Paving shall be further extended to the rear corner of the future storage building at the time of construction of said future building. 6. The applicant shall submit a site and full civil plan set showing the full set of existing, currently proposed, and future building and site improvements as a part of the record Final Stage PUD, including phasing of such buildings and improvements. 7. Lighting and lighting plans in the PUD shall be revised to be consistent with the requirements of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance. 8. Signage shall meet the requirements of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance. 9. Paving and circulation on the site shall be subject to the review and comment of the City Engineer. 10. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations of the City Engineer, per the letter dated May 31st, 2017. 11. The applicant enter into a PUD and Development Agreement for the site specifying for the allowable uses and conditions. The Development CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2016-011 3 Agreement shall be accompanied by recordable cross-access and parking agreements for the two parcels. 12. Conditions recommended by other City staff or the Planning Commission. ADOPTED this 6th day of June, 2016, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota. MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION By: _______________________________ Brad Fyle, Chair ATTEST: ____________________________________________ Angela Schumann, Community Development Director ORDINANCE NO. 6XX 1 CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 10 OF THE MONTICELLO CITY CODE, KNOWN AS THE ZONING ORDINANCE, BY AMENDING THE RED ROOSTER PUD ZONING DISTRICT IN THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, CURRENTLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 1, BLOCK 2, OAKWOOD INDUSTRIAL PARK THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTICELLO HEREBY ORDAINS: Section 1. Section 2.4(O) – Planned Unit Developments, Title 10 – Zoning Ordinance is hereby amended by amending the following: (16) Red Rooster – Chelsea Corner PUD District (a) Purpose. The purpose of the Red Rooster PUD District is to provide for the development of certain real estate subject to the District for office-commercial and industrial services land uses, including the plat of Chelsea Corner. (b) Permitted Uses. Permitted principal uses in the Red Rooster PUD District shall be office-commercial uses as found in the B-2, Limited Business District of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance, and industrial services uses as found in the I-1, Light Industrial District of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance subject to the approved Final Stage Development Plans dated May 23rd, 2016, and as amended on (Council approval date to be inserted), and development agreement dated July 25th, 2016 and as amended on (Council approval date to be inserted), 2017, as may be amended. The introduction of any other use from any district, including Conditional Uses in the B-2 or I-1 Districts, shall be reviewed under the requirements of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 2, Section (O) – Planned Unit Developments for Development Stage PUD and Final Stage PUD. (c) Accessory Uses. Accessory uses shall be those commonly accessory and incidental to office-commercial uses, and as specifically identified by the approved final stage PUD plans. Accessory buildings on the site may be utilized for indoor storage for enterprises which may or may not occupy principal use space on the property and only occasionally have need to utilize the facility, but shall not be operated as self-storage available to the general public. (d) District Performance Standards. Performance standards for the development of any lot in the Red Rooster PUD District shall adhere to the approved final stage PUD plans (including phasing plans) and ORDINANCE NO. 6XX 2 development agreement. In such case where any proposed improvement is not addressed by the final stage PUD, then the regulations of the B-2, Limited Business District shall apply. (e) Amendments. Where changes to the PUD are proposed in the manner of use, density, site plan, development layout, building size, mass, or coverage, or any other change, the proposer shall apply for an amendment to the PUD under the terms of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance, Section 2.4 (O)(10). The City may require that substantial changes in overall use of the PUD property be processed as a new project, including a zoning district amendment. Section 2. The zoning map of the City of Monticello is hereby amendment to rezoned the following described parcels from B-2, Limited Business District to Red Rooster PUD, Planned Unit Development District: Lot 1, Block 2, Oakwood Industrial Park. Section 3. The City Clerk is hereby directed to mark the official zoning map to reflect this ordinance. The map shall not be republished at this time. Section 4. The City Clerk is hereby directed to make the changes required by this Ordinance as part of the Official Monticello City Code, Title 10, Zoning Ordinance, and to renumber the tables and chapters accordingly as necessary to provide the intended effect of this Ordinance. The City Clerk is further directed to make necessary corrections to any internal citations that result from said renumbering process, provided that such changes retain the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance as has been adopted. Section 5. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force from and after its passage and publication. The ordinance in its entiret y and map shall be posted on the City website after publication. Copies of the complete Ordinance and map are available online and at Monticello City Hall for examination upon request. ADOPTED BY the Monticello City Council this ___ day of ____, 2017. __________________________________ Brian Stumpf, Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ Jeff O’Neill, Administrator ORDINANCE NO. 6XX 3 AYES: NAYS: R ed R o oster Prop erties, In c. - R equest fo r Amd t to PUD , D evelo pment Sta ge P UD, & Prelimina ry Plat Lot 1, Block 2 O akwood Industrial Park | 155-018-002012 | 100 Chelsea Road C reated by : C ity of Monticello 285 ft WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTAN Block One12 Typical Trench Compactionand Class B BeddingStandard Plate Library forthe City of Monticello ∆Block One12SBLSBLWright County, MNVICINITY MAPSec. 14, Twp. 121, Rng. 25,14N Building a legacy – your legacy. 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763-541-4800 Fax: 763-541-1700 Equal Opportunity Employer wsbeng.com K:\010148-000\Admin\Docs\LTR-a-schumann-RedRooster 053117.docx May 31, 2017 Ms. Angela Schumann Community Development Director City of Monticello 505 Walnut Street, Suite 1 Monticello, MN 55362 Re: Red Rooster Properties, Inc Site Plan Review City Project No. 2017-017 WSB Project No. 010148 Dear Ms. Schumann: We have reviewed the preliminary plat dated May 8, 2017 and civil plans, dated May 8, 2017, as prepared by Bogart Pederson & Associates offer the following comments. Preliminary Plat 1. Confirm that a recent topographic survey was completed for the site and provide the certificate of survey. 2. Denote the proposed drainage and utility easements more clearly. Confirm that the easements fully contain the public and private mainline utility lines that extend along Chelsea Road and Edmonson Avenue. 3. Show the existing sanitary sewer and watermain including service lines to the site on the preliminary plat or certificate of survey. Site Plan 4. Provide an overall site plan of the entire existing platted property including showing the proposed improvements. 5. Sidewalk shall extend along the doorway on the west side of the proposed building. 6. All sidewalk shall comply with ADA standards. 7. Label the Chelsea Road right of way and proposed drainage and utility easements. May 31, 2017 Page 2 K:\010148-000\Admin\Docs\LTR-a-schumann-RedRooster 053117.docx Grading and Erosion Control Plan 8. Show existing onsite and off-site contours to accurately depict drainage patterns. 9. Label percent grades for the parking lot. 10. Provide additional spot elevations where the parking area will match into the existing pavement to fully depict the drainage patterns. 11. Provide drainage calculations for the proposed storm sewer. 12. Identify all emergency overflow routes and elevations for he proposed parking lot catch basin on the grading plan. The EOF should be a minimum of 1.5’ below the low building opening. 13. The minimum storm sewer pipe size shall be 15-inch per City Design Manual. 14. Further review of the site grading will be completed with the lot survey and building permit submittal. 15. Grading, drainage and erosion control shall comply with City’s zoning ordinance. See Chapter 4, section 4.10 related to grading, drainage, stormwater management and erosion control and the City’s Design Manual- updated May 2017 located on the City’s website- Engineering department. Utility and Removal Plan 16. Show the existing sanitary and water mainlines including labeling material type and size along Chelsea Road. Show the existing sanitary sewer and watermain services and gate valves, including labeling material type and size, to the existing building. 17. Move the proposed curb stop to the property corner between Lot 1 and Lot 2. It will be located in the driveway. 18. Identify if the water service is to be directional bored or open cut. 19. Provide details on how the copper to copper connection will be installed for the proposed 1-inch water service. 20. The applicant shall provide documentation demonstrating how the property owners for Lot 1 and 2 will maintain the 1-inch water service serving the lots from the mainline in Chelsea Road to the buildings. This service line will not owned or maintained by the City. 21. Identify traffic control measures needed for directional boring the sanitary sewer services. May 31, 2017 Page 3 K:\010148-000\Admin\Docs\LTR-a-schumann-RedRooster 053117.docx 22. Identify a water-tight booted connection shall be installed at the manhole. 23. A utility excavation permit must be obtained from the Public Works department prior to commencement of utility connections. 24. Provide an as-built utility plan once construction is complete. Details 25. Detail plates shall be updated per the City’s April 2017 General Specifications and Standard Detail Plates for Street and Utility Construction located on the City’s website- Engineering department. Stormwater Management 26. Confirm that the proposed site improvement does not create 1 acre or more of new impervious surface, thus volume reduction is not required. Describe the impervious areas denoted on the Landscaping Plan include as it identifies more than one acre of impervious surface. 27. If 1 acre or more of the site is being disturbed, a NPDES/SDS Construction Storm Water General Permit and SWPPP shall be provided prior to construction commencing. Please confirm the site disturbance area. Other 28. The applicant shall be informed that the City is considering reconstructing Chelsea Road and adding sidewalk along the proposed property in 2018. An assessment for these improvements will be levied to the property following state statue requirements. Please have the applicant provide a written response addressing the comments above. Please give me a call at 763-271-3236 if you have any questions or comments regarding this letter. Thank you. Sincerely, WSB & Associates, Inc. Shibani K. Bisson, PE City Engineer cc: Steve Grittman, NAC skb May 31, 2017 Page 4 K:\010148-000\Admin\Docs\LTR-a-schumann-RedRooster 053117.docx Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/2017 1 2F. Public Hearing – Consideration of a request to amend the Monticello Zoning Ordinance Chapter 5, Section 3 for regulations for accessory use outdoor storage in industrial districts.Applicant: City of Monticello (AS) Property:City of Monticello Planning Case Number:2017-020 A.REFERENCE & BACKGROUND The Planning Commission is asked to review and recommend proposed amendments to the City’s zoning ordinance for outdoor storage in the I-1 and I-2 industrial zoning districts. Recent discussions by the EDA and IEDC regarding the availability of industrial land and the tools needed to achieve the City’s comprehensive plan goals for attracting and retaining living wage jobs and diversification and growth of tax base have led to a staff review of the current zoning ordinances pertaining to industrial use types and more specifically to outdoor storage. The use of land for the construction of bricks and mortar buildings which produce both jobs and tax base is at the core of the rationale for the proposed changes to the outdoor storage regulations. At present, the City allows outside storage in the I-1 and I-2 zoning districts as a permitted use (except when directly adjacent to residential uses) in an amount that may be as large as the principal building of the principal use of a parcel. As such, large amounts of industrial land may be used to support outdoor storage accessory uses rather than preserving land which could be used for new or expanded principal use buildings. One of the primary goals for the amendment is to balance the need for outdoor storage for industrial uses with the preservation of industrial land for buildings and jobs. In addition, the proposed amendments attempt to address the comprehensive plan goal of encouraging step-up development overall and with maintaining compatibility with other land uses. Finally, the standards for the storage in terms of screening, fencing and surfacing lack needed clarity and clear references to other sections of applicable code. The proposed amendments address these issues through the following: •Addition of a requirement for conditional use permit for outdoor storage in where outdoor storage is proposed to be located adjacent to non-industrial uses in both the I-1 and I-2 districts. •Limiting the allowable area for outdoor storage specific to the district. Less outdoor storage would be allowed in the I-1 unless authorized through conditional use permit, while the current allowance for outdoor storage in the I-2 District (up to the size of the principal building) would be maintained. Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/2017 2 •Limiting the locations of outdoor storage to side and rear yards and side yards on double-fronting lots. •Refined standards for fencing in both I -1 and I-2 Districts. •Requires surfacing of outdoor storage and a reference to City codes for erosion control and stormwater management to support compliance with MPCA industrial stormwater permitting standards and City stormwater management best practices. Zoning ordinance definitions for light industrial and heavy industrial uses and allowable principal uses within each district are included for reference. Also attached are current examples of outdoor storage in Monticello. The examples vary in the amount of outside storage relative to the principal building. The proposed amendments were reviewed by the IEDC in March and April. The IEDC recommend some adjustment to the original amendment language proposed by staff, which specifically focused on larger square footage allowances for outdoor storage. The EDA reviewed the proposed ordinance in May and concurred with the IEDC’s recommendations. As such, the EDA and IEDC’s recommendations are reflected in the proposed ordinance amendments. B.ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1.Motion to adopt Resolution PC-2017-014, recommending adoption of Ordinance 6XX, for amendments to Monticello Zoning Ordinance Chapter 5, Section 3 for regulations for accessory use outdoor storage in industrial districts, based on findings in said resolution. 2.Motion to adopt Resolution PC-2017-014, recommending adoption of Ordinance 6XX, for amendments to Monticello Zoning Ordinance Chapter 5, Section 3 for regulations for accessory use outdoor storage in industrial districts, based on findings in said resolution and subject to those recommended revisions of the Planning Commission. 3.Motion to deny adoption of Resolution PC-2017-014, recommendation adoption of Ordinance 6XX, for amendments to Monticello Zoning Ordinance Chapter 5, Section 3 for regulations for accessory use outdoor storage in industrial districts, based on findings to be made by the Planning Commission. 4.Motion to table action for additional information. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff will recommend the adoption of the proposed ordinance amendments to the Planning Commission. The proposed amendments support the comprehensive plan goals of attracting and retaining living wage jobs and diversification and growth of tax base through the maximization of industrial land for building and job creation. Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/2017 3 The ordinances also support a review for compatibility between differing land uses and maintenance of development requirements and standards. D. SUPPORTING DATA: A.Resolution PC-2017-014 B.Draft – Ordinance No. 6XX, Outdoor Storage Amendment C.Excerpt, Monticello Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 5, Section 3 D.Excerpts, Monticello Comprehensive Plan E.Current Examples of Outside Storage CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-014 1 RECOMMENDING AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 10 OF THE MONTICELLO ZONING CODE RELATED TO CHAPTER 5, SECTION 3(D) – ADDITIONAL SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR CERTAIN ACCESSORY USES WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan provides for goals of attracting and retaining jobs and increasing tax base; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Ordinance serves as the primary implementation tool of the City’s Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives; and WHEREAS, Chapter 5, Section 5(3)(D) of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance relating to Outdoor Storage within industrial districts has been identified as benefitting from amendment in support of these comprehensive Plan goals; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 6th, 2017 on the amendments and members of the public were provided the opportunity to present information to the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered all of the comments and the staff report, which are incorporated by reference into the resolution; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello makes the following Findings of Fact in relation to the recommendation of approval: 1. The proposed amendments improve the ability of the Planning Commission and City Council to direct land use and land use policy in the City. 2. The proposed amendments are consistent with achieving the goals and objectives outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota, that the Commission recommends that the City Council adopts the proposed amendments as presented and approved. ADOPTED this 6th day of June, 2017 by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota. CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-014 2 MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION By: _______________________________ Brad Fyle, Chair ATTEST: ____________________________________________ Angela Schumann, Community Development Director ORDINANCE NO. 6XX 1 CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 10 OF THE MONTICELLO CITY CODE, KNOWN AS THE ZONING ORDINANCE, ADDRESSING CHAPTER 5, SECTION 3(D) –ADDITIONAL SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR CERTAIN ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES IT IS HEREBY ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Monticello, Minnesota: Section 1. Chapter 5, Section 3(D) – Additional Specific Standards for Certain Accessory Uses and Structures is hereby amended to read as follows: (26) Outdoor Storage (b) In the I-1 and I-2 districts, the following shall apply: (i) When abutting a zoning district or use other than industrial, residential district or residential use, the outdoor storage use shall require authorization through a conditional use permit following the provisions of Section 2.4(D) of this ordinance. (ii) The storage area shall be located within the rear yard, except that an outdoor storage area may also include that area between the front building line and the rear yard along the interior lot side. Storage may not be located beyond the side building line on the street side of a corner lot. On a double-fronting lot, outdoor storage may be located in the side yard only. (iii) In the I-1 District, outdoor storage shall be limited to 50% of the gross square footage of the principal building. Storage may be increased up to 100% of the gross square footage of the principal building by conditional use permit. (iv) In the I-2 District, outdoor storage shall be limited to an area not to exceed the gross square footage of the principal building. (v) In the I-1 District. outdoor storage areas shall meet the minimum building setback from all side and rear property lines per the requirements of this ordinance and when adjacent to zoning districts or uses other than industrial, shall be located a minimum of 50’ feet from the adjacent property line. (vi) In the I-2 District, outdoor storage shall be setback 10’ from all side and rear property lines and when adjacent to zoning districts or uses other than industrial, shall be located a minimum of 50’ feet from the adjacent property line. ORDINANCE NO. 6XX 2 (vii) The area is fenced and screened from view of neighboring residential uses and from the public right of way in compliance with this section in compliance with Section 4.1(I) of this ordinance. a. In the I-1 district, screening shall consist of masonry walls or fencing constructed of wood or vinyl and shall provide for 100% opacity. Such fences or walls shall meet all other the requirements of Section 4.3 of this ordinance. b. In the I-2 District, metal fences may be permitted when the materials have been recycled and reprocessed to resemble new building materials and are designed for use as a fencing material, and when such materials are designed to resemble allowed materials as listed in section 4.3(J)(1). c. Additional landscaping of one evergreen tree per 6’ of linear fenceline is required to be planted along the exterior of outdoor storage area in conformance with Section 4.1 of this ordinance. Trees may be staggered along fenceline. d. Fences and walls shall not exceed 15’ in height as measured from the existing grade to the top of the fence panel. e. Height of storage may not exceed the screening wall or fence, or the height of required landscaping. (viii) Outdoor storage shall be allowed only on improved surface of asphalt or concrete. (ix) Storage in shipping containers shall be prohibited unless such storage occurs within the screened outdoor storage area. (x) There shall be no storage of hazardous waste, as defined by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. (xi) Exterior storage areas shall comply with all applicable fire codes and no portion of the outdoor storage shall block access to hydrants, fire sprinklers, or other fire-fighting equipment. (xii) Storage is screened from view from the public right-of-way in compliance with Section 4.1(I) of this ordinance. (xiii) Storage area is grassed or surfaced to control dust. (xiv) Vehicle storage shall not be permitted in front yards. (xv) Noise shall be controlled consistent with the standards of this ordinance. (xvi) All lighting shall be in compliance with Section 4.4 of this ordinance. (xvii) Does not take up parking space as required for conformity to this ordinance. ORDINANCE NO. 6XX 3 (xviii) Outdoor storage areas shall comply with all requirements for grading, drainage, stomrwater managment and erosion control per Section 4.10 of this ordinance. Section 2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to make the changes required by this Ordinance as part of the Official Monticello City Code, Title 10, Zoning Ordinance, and to renumber the tables and chapters accordingly as necessary to provide the intended effect of this Ordinance. The City Clerk is further directed to make necessary corrections to any internal citations that result from said renumbering process, provided that such changes retain the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance as has been adopted. Section 3. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force from and after its passage and publication. The ordinance in its entirety shall be posted on the City website after publication. Copies of the complete Ordinance are available online and at Monticello City Hall for examination upon request. __________________________________ Brian Stumpf, Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ Jeff O’Neill, Administrator AYES: NAYS: CHAPTER 5: USE STANDARDS Section 5.1 Use Table Subsection (A) Explanation of Use Table Structure City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 321 TABLE 5-1: USES BY DISTRICT (cont.) Use Types “P” = Permitted “C” = Conditionally Permitted “I” = Interim Permitted Base Zoning Districts Additional Requirements A O R A R 1 R 2 T N R 3 R 4 M H B 1 B 2 B 3 B 4 C C D I B C I 1 I 2 Vehicle Fuel Sales C C C SEE TABLE 5-1A 5.2(F)(30) Vehicle Sales and Rental C 5.2(F)(31) Veterinary Facilities (Rural) C 5.2(F)(32) Veterinary Facilities (Neighborhood) C C C 5.2(F)(32) Wholesale Sales P P P None Industrial Uses Auto Repair – Major C *SEE TABLE 5-1A P P 5.2(G)(1) Bulk Fuel Sales and Storage P P 5.2(G)(2) Contractor's Yard, Temporary I I I 5.2(G)(3) Extraction of Materials I I I 5.2(G)(4) General Warehousing C C P P 5.2(G)(5) Heavy Manufacturing C 5.2(G)(6) Industrial Services C P None Land Reclamation C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C 5.2(G)(7) Light Manufacturing P P P 5.2(G)(8) Machinery/Truck Repair & Sales P P 5.2(G)(9) Recycling and Salvage Center C C 5.2(G)(10) Self-Storage Facilities P C P 5.2(G)(11) Truck or Freight Terminal C P P 5.2(G)(12) Waste Disposal & Incineration C 5.2(G)(13) Wrecker Services C P 5.2(G)(14) TABLE 5-1A: CENTRAL COMMUNITY DISTRICT (CCD) USES Use Types “P” = Permitted “C” = Conditionally Permitted “I” = Interim Permitted Sub-Districts Exceptions Additional Requirements F-1 F-2 F-3 L Brew Pub P P P P none 5.2(F)(7) Commercial Day Care C C C C none 5.2(F)(12) Commercial Lodging P P C none 5.2(F)(8) CHAPTER 5: USE STANDARDS Section 5.3 Accessory Use Standards Subsection (C) Table of Permitted Accessory Uses Page 370 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance TABLE 5-4: ACCESSORY USES BY DISTRICT (cont.) Use Types “P” = Permitted “C” = Conditionally Permitted “I” = Interim Permitted Base Zoning Districts Additional Requirements A O R A R 1 R 2 T N R 3 R 4 M H B 1 B 2 B 3 B 4 C C D I B C I 1 I 2 Indoor Storage P P P P P P 5.3(D)(20) Incidental Light Manufacturing P P P P P P P P 5.3(D)(21) Machinery/Trucking Repair & Sales C 5.3(D)(22) Office P P P P P P none Off-street Loading Space P P C P P P P P P P 4.9 Off-street Parking P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P 4.8 Open Sales P C C C 5.3(D)(23) Operation and storage of agricultural vehicles, equipment, and machinery P 5.3(D)(24) Outdoor Sidewalk Sales & Display (businesses) P P P P P P P P 5.3(D)(25) Outdoor Storage P P P P P P P P P P Residential 5.3(D)(25)(a) Industrial 5.3(D)(25)(b) Park Facility Buildings & Structures (public) P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P 5.3(D)(26) Private Amateur Radio P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P 4.13(B) Private Receiving Antennae and Antenna Support Structures P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P 4.13(C) Retail Sales of Goods (as part of an office or industrial use) P P P P P P C C 5.3(D)(27) Shelters (Storm or Fallout) P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P 5.3(D)(28) Sign(s) P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P 5.3(D)(29) Solar Energy System P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P 5.3(D)(30) Swimming Pool P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P 5.3(D)(31) Taproom (Retail Sales Accessory to Production Brewery) C C C C C C 5.3(D)(33) Large Trash Handling and Recycling Collection Area P P P P P P P P P P P P 5.3(D)(34) CHAPTER 5: USE STANDARDS Section 5.3 Accessory Use Standards Subsection (D) Additional Specific Standards for Certain Accessory Uses City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 387 (26) Outdoor Storage (a) In all zoning districts, all materials and equipment, except as specifically denoted in this ordinance, shall be stored within a building or fully screened so as not to be visible from adjoining properties except for the following: (i) Clothes line pole and wire. (ii) Recreational equipment and vehicles, subject to off-street parking regulations in Section 4.8 of this ordinance. (iii) Construction and landscaping material currently being used on the premises. (iv) Off-street parking of passenger vehicles, emergency vehicles and small commercial vehicles in residential areas, unless otherwise required to be screened according to Section 4.8 of this ordinance. (v) Propane tanks, fuel oil tanks, and other similar residential heating fuel storage tanks which do not exceed 1,000 gallons in capacity and shall not be located within five (5) feet of any property line. (vi) Wood piles in which wood is stored for fuel provided that not more than 10 cords shall be stored on any property. A cord shall be 4'x4'x8'. (vii) All wood piles shall be five (5) feet or more from the rear and side yard property lines and shall be stored behind the appropriate setback line in front yards. (viii) Solar energy systems. (ix) Wind energy conversion systems. (b) In the I-1 and I-2 districts, the following shall apply: (i) When abutting a residential district or residential use, the outdoor storage use shall require authorization through a conditional use permit following the provisions of Section 2.4(D) of this ordinance. (ii) The area is fenced and screened from view of neighboring residential uses in compliance with Section 4.1(I) of this ordinance. (iii) Storage is screened from view from the public right-of-way in compliance with Section 4.1(I) of this ordinance. (iv) Storage area is grassed or surfaced to control dust. (v) Vehicle storage shall not be permitted in front yards. (vi) Noise shall be controlled consistent with the standards of this ordinance. (vii) All lighting shall be in compliance with Section 4.4 of this ordinance. (viii) Does not take up parking space as required for conformity to this ordinance. Section 4.8: Off- Street Parking CHAPTER 5: USE STANDARDS Section 5.3 Accessory Use Standards Subsection (D) Additional Specific Standards for Certain Accessory Uses Page 388 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance (27) Park Facility Buildings and Structures Limitations on number and size for accessory buildings and structures shall not apply to active or passive public park facilities. (28) Retail Sales of Goods (as part of an office or industrial use) (a) Location: (i) All sales are conducted indoors within a clearly defined area of the principal building reserved exclusively for retail sales. Said sales area must be physically segregated from other principal activities in the building. (ii) The retail sales area must be located on the ground floor of the principal building. (b) Sales Area. The retail sales activity shall not occupy more than fifteen (15) percent of the gross floor area of the building. (c) Access. The building where such use is located is one having direct access to a collector or arterial level street without the necessity of using residential streets. (d) Hours. Hours of operation are limited to 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. The provisions of this section are considered and satisfactorily met. (29) Shelters (Storm or Fallout) Storm and fallout shelters shall not alter the character of the premises with respect to the primary use as permitted in the district. (30) Sign(s) All signs within the City shall comply with the finishing standards contained in Section 4.5, Signs. (31) Solar Energy Systems (a) All Solar Energy Systems (i) All solar energy systems shall be operable and maintained in good repair. (ii) Solar energy systems shall meet all required setbacks and height requirements of the underlying zoning district. (iii) Solar energy systems shall be an integral part of the structure to which they are attached. Section 4.5: Signs CHAPTER 8: RULES & DEFINITIONS Section 8.4 Definitions Subsection (B) Lots City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 449 MANUFACTURING, HEAVY: The manufacturing of products from raw or unprocessed materials, where the finished product may be combustible or explosive. This category shall also include any establishment or facility using large unscreened outdoor structures such as conveyor belt systems, cooling towers, cranes, storage silos, or similar equipment that cannot be integrated into the building design, or engaging in large-scale outdoor storage. Any industrial use that generates noise, odor, vibration, illumination, or particulate that may be offensive or obnoxious to adjacent land uses, or requires a significant amount of on-site hazardous chemical storage shall be classified under this land use. This use shall include any packaging of the product being manufactured on-site. Examples include but are not limited to the production of the following: large-scale food and beverage operations, lumber, milling, and planing facilities; aggregate, concrete and asphalt plants; foundries, forge shops, open air welding, and other intensive metal fabrication facilities; chemical blending, mixing, or production, and plastic processing and production. MANUFACTURING, LIGHT: The mechanical transformation of predominantly previously prepared materials into new products, including assembly of component parts and the creation of products for sale to the wholesale or retail markets or directly to consumers. Such uses are wholly confined within an enclosed building, do not include processing of hazardous gases and chemicals, and do not emit noxious noise, smoke, vapors, fumes, dust, glare, odor, or vibration. Examples include, but are not limited to: production or repair of small machines or electronic parts and equipment; woodworking and cabinet building; publishing and lithography; computer design and development; research, development, testing facilities and laboratories; apparel production; sign making; assembly of pre-fabricated parts, manufacture of electric, electronic, or optical instruments or devices; manufacture and assembly of artificial limbs, dentures, hearing aids, and surgical instruments or parts; manufacture, processing, and packing of food products or cosmetics; and manufacturing of components, jewelry, clothing, trimming decorations and any similar item. MARQUEE: Any permanent roof like structure projecting beyond a theater building or extending along and projecting beyond the wall of that building, generally designed and constructed to provide protection from the weather. MAXIMUM DENSITY: The number of dwelling units allowed per gross acre of land as controlled by an individual or joint ownership group. MEAN GROUND LEVEL: The elevation established for the purpose of regulating the number of stories and the height of buildings. Grade shall be the mean level of the finished surface of the ground adjacent to the exterior walls of the buildings. MICRO DISTILLERY: A distillery that produces 40,000 proof gallons of liquor or less annually. �::��'i�� ' _ �� Ideally, the Comprehensive Plan does not have an Economic Development chapter. 1he Land Use Plan would be sufficient to channel marl<et forces to meet the development objectives of the community. In reality, certain development needs cannot be met without public intervention. 1he Economic Development chapter of the Plan focuses on the aspects of Monticello's future that require particular attention and action by the City. lhese actions include: ► Attracting and retaining jobs ► Expanding the tax base ► Enhancing the economic vitality of Downtown ► Facilitating redevelopment Attracting and Retaining Jobs 1he creation and retention of jobs is one of the most important objectives for Monticello. Jobs, particularly jobs with income levels capable of supporting a family, are 1<ey to achieving many elements of Monticello's vision for the future. ► Jobs attract residents to the community. Jobs will pay a critical role in creating the type of "move up" housing sought by the City. ► Jobs provide the income needed to support local business and government services. ► Retention of businesses promote community stability by 1<eeping jobs and residents in Monticello. The Community Context chapter of the Comprehensive Plan contains a section on Employment.lhis section contains data about employment in Monticello and of its residents. Among the 1<ey findings in this section are: ► While the community added nearly 5,000 people between 2000 and 2010 according to the U.S. Census, it only added 1,430 jobs according to the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW). In 2010, the community had 6,992 jobs according to the QCEW but 7,093 people in the labor force according to the Census. � � 2008 Comprehensive Plan � Updated 2013 Economic Development � 4-1 ► The U.S. Census Bureau, Center for Economic Studies' OntheMap website shows that in 2010 4,597 people leave the community each day to worl<, while 3,849 people come into the community to worl<. Only 835 both live and worl< in the community. ► ► ► ► ► Approximately 15% of residents in 2010 are employed within the community.lhis has dropped from 18% in 2002. As shown in Figure 4.1, 2012 data from the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) on their mnprospector.com website shows that Monticello is made up of a wide range of small to medium sized employers. Only 10 employers have more than 100 employees. Over half have fewer than four (4) employees. Worl<ers for Monticello businesses come primarily from Monticello and the surrounding region. Nearly 75% of people worl<ing in Monticello live in Monticello, adjacent townships, or other places in Wright and Sherburne counties (2010 OntheMap). Nearly 40% of Monticello residents worl< in Hennepin County, with the largest percentage in Minneapolis, Plymouth, and Maple Grove. Another 15% worl< elsewhere in Wright County, including Buffalo and St. Michael. The 2007-2011 American Community Survey (ACS) Census reported a mean travel time to worl< of 28.5 minutes. lhis is up from the 2000 Census travel time of 24 minutes. 1he mean travel time in the 2007-2011 ACS was 29.7 minutes for Wright County and 24.5 minutes for the region overall. Figure 4-1: 2012 Total Establishments by Size e' .�. 1-4 Employees 254 52.05 5-9 Employees 97 19.88 10-19 Employees 64 13.11 20-49 Employees 42 8.61 50-99 Employees 21 4.30 100-249 Employees 7 1.43 250-499 Employees 2 0.41 500-999 Employees 1 0.20 Background Reports 1he City of Mondcello conducts studies and assessments as needed to help guide its economic development efforts. 1he findings and recommendations of these studies are summarized below with the most recent provided first. 2010 Business Retention and Expansion Research (BR&E) Report Monticello's Business Retention and Expansion (BR&E) program was initiated by the City of Monticello, the Monticello Chamber of Commerce and Industry, DEED, and the University of Minnesota Extension. It was also sponsored by over a dozen local businesses. Through the BR&E program, 60 businesses were visited. Findings from the visits and data analysis found: ► 78% of the visited businesses were locally owned and operated. ► 20% of businesses were in manufacturing, 18% in retail trade, and 13% in other services. ► 1he businesses employed over 1,600 full-time and 975 part-time employees, with a trimmed average (an average where the low and high were discarded to prevent sl<ewing) of 15.38 full-time employees, slightly down from 15.52 three years ago. The firms also had a trimmed average of 7.76 part-time employees, up from 6.96 three years ago. ► Most full-time employees are in manufacturing, food and beverage, retail trade, and medical, while part-time employees are in medical, retail trade, and tourism/recreational services. ► Survey results indicated that the medical industry is the highest employer in Monticello, followed by retail trade and manufacturing. ► Businesses in the community are fairly stable with about half expecting some type of change. 1he BR&E identified four strategies aimed at helping businesses become more profitable. Each strategy was accompanied by a list of potential projects intended to be ideas for the community to explore. 1he implementation of the projects is intended to be a collaborative effort among the various sectors of the community.lhe four strategies identified included: 4-2 � Economic Development City of Monticello ► Improve Business Retention and Expansion lhrough Technical and Development Assistance. ► Improve Labor Force Availability and Productivity. ► Improve Infrastructure to Help Move Goods, Customers, and the Labor Force More Efficiendy. ► Improve and Promote the Quality of Life in Monticello. During the 2013 comprehensive plan economic development update process, it was noted that the 2010 Business Retention and Expansion Research strategies were similar to the 2008 Development Strategies.lhe review process identified the need to continue similar strategies into the future. Preceding the development of the 2008 Comprehensive Plan an assessment was conducted by St. Cloud State University to determine whether a bioscience parl< should be established in Monticello. At that time the bioscience industry was an economic development focus statewide. While the attraction of a bioscience business is not a particular focus of Monticello today, there are findings of that study that can be useful to consider in the overall development of economic development strategies for the community. Some of the Monticello's strengths for attracting businesses included: ► Land availability (compared to Metro Area). ► Access to major highways (I-94, U.S. 10 and STH 25). ► Regional growth of employment base. ► Development of local fiber optic system. ► Proximity to universities. ► Overalllocation. ► Expansive parl< system. ► Monticello Community Center. Recommended business development activities that apply to the attraction and retention of all businesses include ensuring that there are sites suitable and attractive to potential businesses available and ready for development. The community should continue to explore and establish partnerships with a variety of stal<eholders that can worl<together to support business attracdon and retendon. This includes the identificadon of funding sources which may be an incentive for businesses locating in Monticello. When available the City should participate in special tax zones that have been made available at the state and federal level to support business development and retention. Expanding the Tax Base A traditional objective of local economic development planning is the expansion of the property tax base. Under the current system of local government finance, property taxes are the largest source of city revenue. For this reason, it is an important aspect of economic development planning in Monticello. Understanding the Property Tax System Effective strategies to promote the growth of the tax base require a clear understanding of the property tax system. Property Valuation There are three forms of property valuation. The foundation of the property tax system is Estimated Marl<et Value. lhis amount is the value of a parcel of property as set by the County Assessor. In some circumstances, the State Legislature limits the amount of Estimated Marl<et Value that can be used for taxation. lhese adjustments result in the Taxable Marl<et Value. The value used to calculate property taxes is Tax Capacity. Tax Capacity Value is a percentage of Taxable Marl<et Value. 1he percentage factors are set by the State Legislature and vary by class of property. Changes in the Tax System Traditional economic development theory seel<s commercial and industrial development as a means of building tax base. Historically, the system supported this approach. A dollar of estimated marl<et value of commercial-industrial property carried a higher tax capacity value than residential property. Over the past twelve years, tax "reforms" by the State Legislature have changed this situation. 2008 Comprehensive Plan � Updated 2013 Economic Development � 4-3 Facilitating Redevelopment 1he Comprehensive Plan seel<s to create a place where land use plans, policies, and controls worl< together with private investment to properly maintain all properties in Monticello. It is recognized that this approach may not succeed in all locations. Despite the best plans and intentions, properties may become physically deteriorated and/or economically inviable. In such places, city intervention may be need to facilitate redevelopment and prevent the spread of blight. This intervention may include: ► Acquisition of land. ► Preparation of sites for development. ► Construction or reconstruction of public improvements. ► Provision of adequate parl<ing supply. ► Remediation of polluted land as needed. ► Removal of other physical and economic barriers to achieve community objectives. lhese actions may require the use of tax increment financing, tax abatement, or other finance tools available to the City. Development Strategies 1he following strategies will be used to implement the Comprehensive Plan in the area of Economic Development: 1. The City must use the Comprehensive Plan to provide adequate locations for future job- producing development (Places to Worl<). 2. 1he City should adhere to the Comprehensive Plan to encourage stable business setting and promote investment and expansion of facilities. 3. The City should coordinate utility planning and manage other development to ensure that expansion areas are capable of supporting new development in a timely manner. 4. The City will continue to worl< with existing businesses to maintain an excellent business environment, retain jobs, and facilitate expansions. 5. In addition to assisting business seel<ing to locate in Monticello, the City should actively target and marl<et to businesses which will be a supplier, customer or collaborative partner to existing businesses within the community. 6. 1he City should target and marl<et to businesses which would benefit from Monticello's utility and communications infrastructure. 7. 1he City will worl< with the CentraCare Health System to ensure the retention and to promote the expansion of health care services in Monticello. 8. The City will use the Comprehensive Plan to maintain and enhance the quality of life in Monticello as a tool for attracting businesses and jobs. 2008 Comprehensive Plan � Updated 2013 Economic Development � 4-7 Zoning: I-1 (Light Industrial) Lot Area: 87,120 Building Area: 15,500 Storage Area: 5,800 Ratios: Storage area is 7% of the lot Storage area is 37% of the building area/building is 18% of the lot area *Estimates Zoning: I-1 (Light Industrial) Lot Area: 87,190 Building Area: 18,000 Storage Area: 20,500 Ratios: Storage area is 24% of the lot Storage area is 114% of the building area/building is 21% of the lot area *Estimates Zoning: I-2 (Heavy Industrial) Lot Area: 243,200 Building Area: 51,850 Storage Area: 0 Ratios: Building area is 21% of the lot area *Estimates Zoning: I-2 (Heavy Industrial) Lot Area: 231,150 Building Area: 16,800 Storage Area: 43,300 Ratios: Storage area is 19% of the lot Storage area is 258% of the building area/building is 7% of the lot area *Estimates Outdoor Storage Proposed Zoning Amendment • Discussions regarding the availability of industrial land and tools to achieve the City's comprehensive plan goals led to zoning review • Attracting and retaining living wage jobs • Diversification and growth of tax base Encouraging step-up development overall Maintaining compatibility with other land uses • Evaluate and balance: • Land for the construction of bricks and mortar buildings which produce both jobs and tax base Need for outdoor storage for industrial uses to retain and create jobs Staff prepared proposed amendment to address: • Comp plan goals • Clarity (zoning references) Standar Adjacent to industrial Adjacent to use other than industrial Size Screening Setback Location �Iqzff— We Proposed Permitted Permitted Permitted, except when abutting CUP residential requires CUP Up to square footage of principal 1-1: Up to 50% permitted; up to building in both 1-1 and 1-2 square footage of building by CUP 1-2: Permitted up to square footage of building Per 4.1 of zoning 15' fence and landscaping 6' from property lines per general 1-1: equal to building setback standards 1-2: lo' interior side and rear; equal to building setback in front and corner side Unclear *50' when abutting use other than industrial Rear and side yards (interior side) Corner lots — interior only • Fence and wall materials: • 1-z District: masonry walls or fencing constructed of masonry, wood or vinyl at l00% opacity. • 1-2 District: metal fences may be permitted when the materials have been recycled and reprocessed to resemble new building materials and are designed for use as a fencing material, top and bottom edge finish • Height of storage may not exceed the screening wall or fence, or the height of required landscaping at maturity Improved surface of asphalt or concrete • Storage in shipping containers allowed within the screened outdoor storage area • No storage of hazardous waste, as defined by MPCA • Comply with all applicable fire codes and no portion of the outdoor storage shall block access to hydrants, fire sprinklers, or other fire- fighting equipment • Noise controlled consistent with ordinance • Lighting in compliance with ordinance • Compliance with all requirements for grading, drainage, stormwater management and erosion control Q. U r- m LnL aa' C Ln 40 C PUBLIC ROW 50' BUlldin and St rage etback Industrial ncipal Buildin i-1 40,000 SF v L Fencelin L fufu } OUTDOOR STORAGE AREA m 20,06 sf permitted OUTDOOR STORAGE AREA +20,000 SF by CUP (up to 40,000 sf) Eligible Outdoor Stora a irea Rear Yard: 15' Building and Storage Setback Industrial User 2 c m tin 0 0 0 0 PUBLIC ROW Fenceline OUTDOOR STORAGE AREA 40,000 sf permitted 20' Fence 30' Corner Side Ya Setback rj�** 0000010 Eligible Outdoor Storage Area 10' Outdoor Storage Setback Industrial User 0 m CL • IEDC recommended amendments with proposed revisions • EDA review • Recommendation: • Alternative #1 Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/2017 1 2G. Public Hearing – Consideration of a request to amend to the Monticello Zoning Ordinance Chapter 4, Section 3 – Fences and Walls; Chapter 4, Section 5 for regulations for multi-tenant building signage, Chapter 5, Section 3 for regulations on Accessory Use Dwellings, and Chapter 5, Section 4 for regulations for Temporary Uses – Food Trucks. Applicant: City of Monticello (AS) Property:City of Monticello Planning Case Number:2017-021 A.REFERENCE & BACKGROUND The Planning Commission is asked to review and provide a recommendation on various proposed amendments to the City’s zoning ordinance. The amendments are proposed to provide clarity to existing ordinances, resolve conflict within code section language, and correspond to regulations recently adopted into the City Code. To follow is a summary of each proposed amendment: •4.3 - Fencing & Walls o Amendment to regulations for fences and walls which clarify material type by district o Adding an allowance for low-profile “garden” fencing o Amendments are proposed consistent with the fencing detail proposed in the previous outdoor storage amendments, allowing outdoor storage in rear yards only and metal fencing in the I-2 district when comparable to other materials o Amendments consistent with Building Code, which allows fences up to 7’ in height without building permit •4.5 – Signs Amendment to allow individual tenant signs without separate exclusive entrance when a comprehensive sign plan is submitted; requires an administrative review only as proposed. As multi-tenant commercial and industrial building projects are developed in the community, it is becoming a more common request to accommodate such signage. In many cases, tenant spaces are served by a common door or vestibule, then breaking off into smaller spaces. The ordinance proposed restricts signage to the base code allowance of 15% of the façade of the building fronting not more than two public streets, but expands sign allowances for individual tenants with or without the exclusive entrance. Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/2017 2 •5.3 – Accessory Uses The Planning Commission is asked to strike “Accessory Dwelling Unit” provisions in their entirety. At the time the most recent codification of the zoning ordinance was developed, “Accessory Dwelling Units” was added to the listing of accessory uses in support of life-cycle housing options. Accessory Dwelling Units are defined as “A dwelling unit, either within the same building as the single-family dwelling unit or in a detached building. Accessory dwelling units shall be developed in accordance with the standards set forth in this ordinance and only in those zoning districts where permitted.” Accessory dwelling units are permitted as accessory in single and two family residential districts under current code allowances. Given recent legal activity regarding these uses, particularly for detached accessory dwelling units, and the changing nature of these uses in terms of permanent, temporary and moveable structures, staff is proposing at this time to remove the allowance from the code. The recommendation is further supported by the idea that the Commission and City Council would best served by regulations developed after some of the more substantive legal questions are settled and additional research and case studies can be brought to both groups for review and discussion. An interim ordinance is not recommended due to the unknown time frame under which some of the legal issues would be settled. The definition for the use is also proposed for removal at this time. Commission will note that striking these provisions does not impact two- family allowances in the R-2 District (such as duplexes). •5.4 – Temporary Uses The Planning Commission is asked to amend the table for temporary uses consistent with ordinances recently adopted by the City Council relating to food trucks. The City Code allows food trucks by permit and as such, the Zoning Ordinance is proposed to be amended simply to note the allowance and refer to the applicable City Code section. B.ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1.Motion to adopt Resolution PC-2017-015 recommending adoption of Ordinance 6XX, for amendments to Monticello Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 4, Section 3 – Fences and Walls; Chapter 4, Section 5 for regulations for multi-tenant building signage, Chapter 5, Section 3 for regulations on Accessory Use Dwellings, and Chapter 5, Section 4 for regulations for Temporary Uses – Food Trucks, based on findings in Resolution PC-2017-0. Planning Commission Agenda – 06/06/2017 3 2.Motion to adopt Resolution PC-2017-15 recommending adoption of Ordinance 6XX, for amendments to Monticello Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 4, Section 3 – Fences and Walls; Chapter 4, Section 5 for regulations for multi-tenant building signage, Chapter 5, Section 3 for regulations on Accessory Use Dwellings, and Chapter 5, Section 4 for regulations for Temporary Uses – Food Trucks, based on findings in Resolution PC-2017-0,subject to those comments of the Planning Commission. 3.Motion to deny adoption of Resolution PC-2017-015 recommending adoption of Ordinance 6XX, for amendments to Chapter 4, Section 3 – Fences and Walls; Chapter 4, Section 5 for regulations for multi-tenant building signage, Chapter 5, Section 3 for regulations on Accessory Use Dwellings, and Chapter 5, Section 4 for regulations for Temporary Uses – Food Trucks, based on findings to be made by the Planning Commission. 4.Motion to table action for additional information. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the adoption of the proposed ordinance amendments. As noted in the introduction, the proposed amendments serve to add clarity to existing ordinances, resolve conflict within code sections, and correspond to regulations recently adopted into the City Code. In addition, the removal of provisions for accessory dwelling units at this time allows the City the ability to consider the use in relationship to its Comprehensive Plan objectives, as well as the appropriate specific standards applicable to the use and various zoning districts. D. SUPPORTING DATA: a.Resolution PC-2017-015 b.Draft – Ordinance No. 6XX c.Excerpt, Monticello Zoning Ordinance, Various Sections CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-015 1 RECOMMENDING AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 10 OF THE MONTICELLO ZONING CODE RELATED TO MISCELLANEOUS SECTIONS WHEREAS, the Zoning Ordinance serves as the primary implementation tool of the City’s Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives; and WHEREAS, various portions of the Zoning Ordinance have been identified as benefitting from amendment to increase clarity and usefulness; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 6th, 2017 on the application 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 has identified ordinance amendments to clarify various chapters and sections with changes to the following:  CHAPTER 4, SECTION 3 – FENCES AND WALLS  CHAPTER 4, SECTION 5(J) –DISTRICT REGULATIONS  CHAPTER 5, SECTION 3(C) – TABLE 5-4: ACCESSORY USES BY DISTRICT  CHAPTER 5, SECTION 3(D) – ADDITIONAL SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR CERTAIN ACCESSORY USES  CHAPTER 5, SECTION 4(D) – TABLE 5-6: TEMPORARY USES & STRUCTURES  CHAPTER 8, SECTION 4(B) – DEFINITIONS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello makes the following Findings of Fact in relation to the recommendation of approval: 1. The proposed amendments improve the ability of the Planning Commission and City Council to direct land use and land use policy in the City. 2. The proposed amendments are consistent with the language and intent of the Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota, that the Commission recommends that the City Council adopts the proposed amendments as presented and approved. CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-015 2 ADOPTED this 6th day of June, 2017 by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota. MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION By: _______________________________ Brad Fyle, Chair ATTEST: ____________________________________________ Angela Schumann, Community Development Director ORDINANCE NO. 6XX 1 CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 10 OF THE MONTICELLO CITY CODE, KNOWN AS THE ZONING ORDINANCE, ADDRESSING THE FOLLOWING:  CHAPTER 4, SECTION 3 – FENCES AND WALLS  CHAPTER 4, SECTION 5(J) –DISTRICT REGULATIONS  CHAPTER 5, SECTION 3(C) – TABLE 5-4: ACCESSORY USES BY DISTRICT  CHPATER 5, SECTION 3(D) – ADDITIONAL SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR CERTAIN ACCESSORY USES  CHAPTER 5, SECTION 4(D) – TABLE 5-6: TEMPORARY USES & STRUCTURES  CHAPTER 8, SECTION 4(B) – DEFINITIONS IT IS HEREBY ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Monticello, Minnesota: Section 1. Chapter 4, Section 3 – Fences and Walls, is hereby amended to read as follows: (D) Fences and Walls by District Type (1) Residential Districts In residential districts (see Table 3-1: Base Zoning Districts), fences and walls shall conform to the following: (b) Side or Rear Yards (i) Fences and walls shall not exceed a height of seven six (76) feet in side and rear yards. (2) Business Districts (a) General In business districts (see Table 3-1: Base Zoning Districts), fences and walls shall not be permitted in front yards setback areas, except as may be allowed by the security provisions of this section, and shall not exceed a height of four feet in the remainder of front yards and eight seven (7) feet in side or rear yards., unless the fence in the side or rear yard is located within 15 feet of a public right-of-way, in which case it shall not exceed a height of six feet. If a fence is constructed on top of a retaining or other wall, the combined height of the fence and wall shall not exceed the maximum height that would apply to a fence or wall alone. ORDINANCE NO. 6XX 2 (3) Industrial Districts (a) Industrial and Business Campus District (i) Fences and walls shall not be permitted in front yards setback areas; (ii) Fences shall adhere to the following yard-based requirements: 1. In all front yards, a fence shall not exceed six (6) feet in height and shall be at least 50% transparent. 2. In all side yards, a fence shall not exceed seven six (76) feet in height. 3. In all rear yards, a fence shall not exceed fifteen (15) feet in height provided a building permit is obtained for any additional height over seven (7) feet. (iii) In no event shall a fence exceed seven six (76) feet in height if the fence is located within 15 (20) feet of a public right-of-way. (b) I-1 and I-2 Districts (i) In all front yards, a fence shall not exceed six (6) feet in height and shall be at least 50% transparent. (ii) In all side and rear yards, a fence shall not exceed fifteen (15) feet in height provided a building permit is obtained for any additional height over six (6) feet. (iii) Fences and walls shall not be permitted in front yards setback areas; (iv) Fences shall adhere to the following yard-based requirements: 4. In all front yards, a fence shall not exceed six (6) feet in height and shall be at 5. In all side and rear yards, a fence shall not exceed fifteen (15) feet in height provided a building permit is obtained for any additional height over seven (7) feet. (v) In no event shall a fence exceed seven six (76) feet in height if the fence is located within 15 (20) feet of a public right-of-way. (J) Appearance 1. Customary Materials Fences and walls shall be constructed of any combination of treated wood posts and vertically-oriented planks; metal materials of 14-gauge or better, treated with factory-applied weather resistant coating or galvanized, and framed at top and bottom with permitted materials, maintenance free vinyl, rot-resistant wood; wrought iron; decorative metal materials; brick; stone; or masonry materials.; or products designed to resemble these materials. Where wood, ORDINANCE NO. 6XX 3 masonry, or other opaque materials are specified for particular types of screening or buffering fences or walls, all other fence materials are prohibited. (a) In residential districts, metal materials of 14-gauge or better, when treated with factory-applied weather resistant coating or galvanized, and framed at top and bottom with materials as listed in section (J)(1) above are permitted. (b) Metal or vinyl fence used for garden areas in residential areas may not exceed 24” in height. (c) In the I-2 District, metal fences may be permitted when the materials have been recycled and reprocessed to resemble new building materials and are designed for use as a fencing material, and when such materials are designed to resemble allowed materials as listed in section (J)(1) above. Section 2. Chapter 4, Section 5(J) – Signs, District Regulations is hereby amended to read as follows: J)(2)(d) Multiple Occupancy Commercial and Industrial Buildings (i) Except as provided by window, changeable copy, or temporary signs in this ordinance, Iindividual tenants of a multiple occupancy building within a commercial or industrial zoning district shall not display separate wall, canopy, or marquee signs unless the tenant's business has an exclusive exterior entrance and subject to except through administrative site plan submittal review of a comprehensive sign plan subject to the following requirements: 1. Each Such signs shall be limited to the maximum wall sign size permitted in the applicable zoning district provisions in Section 4.5(J). 2. Such signs shall be located only on the an exterior wall of the tenant space to which the sign permit is issued, but are not required to face a abutting a public street and shall be located on not more than two exterior walls which face a public street. Section 5. Chapter 5, Section 3(C) – Table 5-4: Accessory Uses by District is hereby amended to read as follows: TABLE 5-4: ACCESSORY USES BY DISTRICT Use Types “P” = Permitted “C” = Conditionally Permitted “I” = Interim Permitted Base Zoning Districts Additional Requirements A O R A R 1 R 2 T N R 3 R 4 M H B 1 B 2 B 3 B 4 C C D I B C I 1 I 2 Accessory Dwelling Unit P P P P P 5.3(D)(1) ORDINANCE NO. 6XX 4 Section 6. Chapter 5, Section 3(D) –Additional Standards for Specific Accessory Uses is hereby amended to read as follows: (1) Accessory Dwelling (a) Accessory dwelling units are permitted only on lots with single-family detached dwellings. (b) No more than one accessory dwelling unit per lot is permitted. (c) Detached accessory dwellings shall be architecturally compatible with the principal dwelling. (d) Occupants of accessory dwelling units are limited to the following: (i) Family members of the person occupying the principal structure. Family members include parents, children, siblings, grandparents, aunts, uncles, and cousins of an occupant of the primary structure. (ii) Employee of the occupant of the principal structure whose employment is directed to the principal structure and/or the associated land area of the principal structure. (iii) Employee who provides medical and/or personal care services to an occupant of the primary structure. (e) Accessory dwelling units shall be positioned in one of the following locations: (i) Within the principal structure (e.g. a lower level apartment); (ii) Attached to the principal building; (iii) Detached and behind the principal structure as a freestanding building or above a detached outbuilding. (f) Attached accessory dwelling units shall adhere to the following: (i) The accessory dwelling unit must be attached to the principal structure and have an operative interconnecting door with the principal structure. (ii) Access to the unit shall only be from the side or rear yard of the principal structure. (g) Detached accessory dwelling units shall adhere to the following: (i) The detached accessory dwelling unit shall be a minimum of six (6) feet from the principal structure. (ii) The accessory dwelling unit must be located in the same base zoning district as the principal structure. ORDINANCE NO. 6XX 5 (h) The use of manufactured homes, travel trailers, campers, tractor trailers, or similar vehicles as an accessory dwelling unit shall be prohibited. (i) An accessory dwelling unit shall have a floor area of at least 300 square feet and shall not exceed 25 percent of the floor area in the principal structure. (j) At least one, but no more than two, off-street parking spaces shall be provided for an accessory dwelling unit (in addition to the required off-street parking serving the principal use). (k) Accessory dwelling units shall not be sold apart from the principal structure. (l) Accessory dwelling units shall not include home occupations. Section 9. Chapter 5, Section 4(E) - Specific Standards for Temporary Uses, Table 5-6 – Temporary Uses & Structures is hereby amended to read as follows: TABLE 5-6: TEMPORARY USES & STRUCTURES Temporary Use or Structure Allowable Duration (per site) Permit(s) Required Additional Requirements Temporary Sale Mobile Food Units See Title 3, Chapter 20, City Code Section 11. Chapter 8, Section 4 - Definitions is hereby amended to include the following terms as defined, or redefined: DWELLING, ACCESSORY UNIT: A dwelling unit, either within the same building as the single-family dwelling unit or in a detached building. Accessory dwelling units shall be developed in accordance with the standards set forth in this ordinance and only in those zoning districts where permitted. Section 12. The City Clerk is hereby directed to make the changes required by this Ordinance as part of the Official Monticello City Code, Title 10, Zoning Ordinance, and to renumber the tables and chapters accordingly as necessary to provide the intended effect of this Ordinance. The City Clerk is further directed to make necessary corrections to any internal citations that result from said renumbering process, provided that such changes retain the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance as has been adopted. Section 13. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force from and after its passage and publication. The ordinance in its entirety shall be posted on the City website after publication. Copies of the complete Ordinance are available online and at Monticello City Hall for examination upon request. ORDINANCE NO. 6XX 6 __________________________________ Brian Stumpf, Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ Jeff O’Neill, Administrator AYES: NAYS: CHAPTER 4: FINISHING STANDARDS Section 4.3 Fences & Walls Subsection (C) General Requirements for Fences and Walls City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 225 4.3 Fences & Walls (A) Purpose and Intent The purpose and intent of this section is to regulate the location, height, and appearance of fences and walls to maintain visual harmony within residential and business districts; protect adjacent properties from the indiscriminate placement and unsightliness of fences and walls; and ensure the safety, security, and privacy of properties. (B) Applicability (1) In General Unless exempted in accordance with Section 4.3(B)(2) below, the provisions of this section shall apply to the construction, reconstruction, or replacement of all fences or walls in the City. In the event of any conflict between the provisions of this section and any screening standard in Section 4.1(I), Screening, the latter shall govern. (2) Exemptions The following are exempted from the requirements of this section. (i) Development in the CCD District Development on lots in the CCD district is exempt from the standards of this section. (ii) Recreational Fencing Customary fencing provided as a part of a permitted tennis court, athletic field, or other recreational facility. (iii) Temporary Fencing Temporary fencing established around construction sites, demolitions, or other site conditions unsafe for pedestrians or vehicles, provided it is consistent with the building code. (C) General Requirements for Fences and Walls (1) Location (a) Fences and walls are permitted anywhere on a lot subject to the following restrictions: CHAPTER 4: FINISHING STANDARDS Section 4.3 Fences & Walls Subsection (C) General Requirements for Fences and Walls Page 226 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance (i) The corner visibility requirements in Section 3.3(D)(2)(b) shall be met. (ii) Fences and walls shall not be located within public right-of-way unless permitted by the Community Development Department by written encroachment agreement. (iii) Fences and walls permitted by the Community Development Department to be within easements are subject to removal without compensation to the property owner if the City must access the area for maintenance or improvement purposes. (iv) Fences and walls shall not be permitted within conservation easements unless specifically permitted by the easement. (b) Fences and walls may be located directly over a property line between two or more parcels of land held in private ownership. (c) A certificate of survey may be required by the Community Development Department to determine the location of fences and walls on a property. (2) Blocking Natural Drainage Flow (a) No fence shall be installed so as to block or divert a natural drainage flow on to or off of any other land. (b) Drainage swales may not be filled to accommodate the construction of fences or walls without alternate storm water provisions being reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department. (c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent the installation of temporary fencing to protect existing trees, limit sedimentation, or control erosion. (3) Fences and Walls within Buffers Fences and walls shall be installed so as not to disturb or damage existing vegetation or installed plant material. The perimeter fencing or wall for a single development shall be of a uniform style that complies with the standards of this section. (4) Permit Requirements (a) A building permit is required for the construction of any fence or wall that will be more than seven (7) feet in height above grade, or for construction of a retaining wall that is more than four (4) feet in height from the bottom of the footing to the top of the wall. Section 4.10: Grading, Drainage, Stormwater Management & Erosion Control Section 4.3(F): Perimeter Fences and Walls Abutting Public Right-of-Way CHAPTER 4: FINISHING STANDARDS Section 4.3 Fences & Walls Subsection (D) Requirements for Fences and Walls by District Type City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 227 (b) Fences which do not require a building permit under the provisions of Section 4.3(D)(4)(a) above may be constructed without a permit, but shall adhere to all fencing requirements in this ordinance. (D) Requirements for Fences and Walls by District Type All fences and walls shall conform to the following standards. In all cases, heights are measured from finished grade on the highest side of the fence or wall. (1) Residential Districts In residential districts (see Table 3-1: Base Zoning Districts), fences and walls shall conform to the following: (a) Front Yards Fences and walls shall not exceed a height of four (4) feet in front yards and that part of side yards from the front lot line to the front building line. (b) Side or Rear Yards (i) Fences and walls shall not exceed a height of six (6) feet in side and rear yards. (ii) In side or rear yards which abut a public street, fences or walls which exceed thirty-six (36) inches in height must be set back at least six (6) feet from the property line, and the setback area shall be landscaped in accordance with the provisions of Section 4.3(J)(4), Appearance. (c) Transparency Fences or walls located within a front yard or side yard adjacent to a street shall maintain a minimum of 50 percent transparency. (d) Access Where any fence or wall connects to a building used as a dwelling, at least one gate not less than 2 feet 6 inches in width shall be required to allow access around the building. CHAPTER 4: FINISHING STANDARDS Section 4.3 Fences & Walls Subsection (D) Requirements for Fences and Walls by District Type Page 228 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance (2) Business Districts (a) General In business districts (see Table 3-1: Base Zoning Districts), fences and walls shall not be permitted in front setback areas, and shall not exceed a height of four feet in the remainder of front yards and eight feet in side or rear yards, unless the fence in the side or rear yard is located within 15 feet of a public right-of-way, in which case it shall not exceed a height of six feet. If a fence is constructed on top of a retaining or other wall, the combined height of the fence and wall shall not exceed the maximum height that would apply to a fence or wall alone. (b) Major Utilities, Wireless Communications, Government Facilities, and Other Public Safety Uses Fences and walls in front, side, and rear yards of major utilities, wireless communication towers, government facilities, and other public safety uses shall not exceed eight feet. (3) Industrial Districts (a) Industrial and Business Campus District (i) Fences and walls shall not be permitted in front setback areas; (ii) Fences shall adhere to the following yard-based requirements: 1. In all front yards, a fence shall not exceed six (6) feet in height and shall be at least 50% transparent. 2. In all side yards, a fence shall not exceed six (6) feet in height. 3. In all rear yards, a fence shall not exceed fifteen (15) feet in height provided a building permit is obtained for any additional height over seven (7) feet. (iii) In no event shall a fence exceed six (6) feet in height if the fence is located within 15 feet of a public right-of-way. (b) I-1 and I-2 Districts (i) In all front yards, a fence shall not exceed six (6) feet in height and shall be at least 50% transparent. (ii) In all side and rear yards, a fence shall not exceed fifteen (15) feet in height provided a building permit is obtained for any additional height over six (6) feet. See also Section 3.3(D)(2)(b) Corner Visibility, for additional restrictions on fence placement. See also Section 3.3(D)(2)(b) Corner Visibility, for additional restrictions on fence placement. CHAPTER 4: FINISHING STANDARDS Section 4.3 Fences & Walls Subsection (F) Perimeter Fences and Walls Abutting Public Rights-of-Way City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 229 (4) Vacant Property Vacant property may be fenced if the fence does not exceed four feet in residential districts and eight feet in business or industrial districts, the fencing maintains a minimum transparency of 50%, and the purpose of the fencing is to discourage unauthorized dumping or unauthorized parking on the property. Fencing of the vacant property shall not be construed to allow use of the property for outdoor storage. (E) Exemption for Security Plan A property owner or tenant or a representative of a public agency responsible for a government facility, public safety use, or other use in need of heightened security may submit to the Community Development Department a site security plan proposing fences or walls taller than those permitted by this section or proposing the use of barbed or concertina wire atop a fence or wall for security reasons. The Community Development Department may approve or approve with conditions the site security plan and its proposed exemption of fences or walls from the standards of this section, upon finding: (1) Taller Fence or Wall Needed for Safety or Security Reasons The condition, location, or use of the property, or the history of activity in the area, indicates the land or any materials stored or used on it are in significantly greater danger of theft or damage than surrounding land, or represent a significant hazard to public safety without a taller fence or the use of barbed or concertina wire atop a fence or wall; and (2) Not Have Security, Functioning Appearance of Adjacent Properties The proposed taller fences or walls or use of barbed or concertina wire will not have a significant adverse effect on the security, functioning, appearance, or value of adjacent properties or the surrounding area as a whole. (F) Perimeter Fences and Walls Abutting Public Rights-of-Way (1) Fences or walls located within 15 feet of a street or public right-of-way shall: (a) Be of a uniform style; (b) Be located outside the public right-of-way; (c) Include breaks, offsets, access points, or other design details in the wall plane at least every 200 feet; CHAPTER 4: FINISHING STANDARDS Section 4.3 Fences & Walls Subsection (H) Chain Link Fencing Page 230 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance (d) Comply with the standards in Section 4.3(J), Appearance; and (e) Comply with the requirements of Section 4.1(I), Standards for Required Screening (if applicable). (2) New residential developments shall be required to construct conforming fencing along the rear yards of all double frontage lots that back up to collector or arterial roadways. (G) Prohibited Fences (1) Fences or walls made of debris, junk, rolled plastic, sheet metal, plywood, wooden landscape lattice or waste materials are prohibited in all zoning districts unless such materials have been recycled and reprocessed for marketing to the general public as building materials that resemble new building materials and are designed for use as a fencing material (e.g., picket fencing made from recycled plastic and fiber). No metal “t” posts shall be permitted. (H) Chain Link Fencing Chain link fencing shall be allowed, subject to the following standards: (1) All Districts In all districts, chain link fences must have a top rail, and barbed ends must be placed at the bottom of the fence. (2) Residential Districts Chain link fencing is permitted on lots within residential zoning districts provided it does not include opaque slats, and does not exceed a height of four (4) feet. (3) Business Districts Chain link fencing shall not be allowed on lots within a business zoning district unless expressly authorized through approval of a security plan under the provisions of Section 4.3(E). (4) Industrial Districts Chain link fencing shall be allowed on lots within industrial zoning districts provided it does not include opaque slats and is coated with black or dark green vinyl. CHAPTER 4: FINISHING STANDARDS Section 4.3 Fences & Walls Subsection (J) Appearance City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 231 (I) Barbed or Razor Wire Barbed or razor wire is prohibited except as expressly authorized through approval of a security plan under the provisions of Section 4.3(E). (J) Appearance (1) Customary Materials Fences and walls shall be constructed of any combination of treated wood posts and vertically-oriented planks; metal materials of 14-gauge or better, treated with factory-applied weather resistant coating or galvanized, and framed at top and bottom with permitted materials; rot-resistant wood; wrought iron; decorative metal materials; brick; stone; masonry materials; or products designed to resemble these materials. Where wood, masonry, or other opaque materials are specified for particular types of screening or buffering fences or walls, all other fence materials are prohibited. (2) Finished Side to Outside Wherever a fence or wall is installed, if one side of the fence or wall appears more “finished” than the other (e.g., one side has visible support framing and the other does not), then the more “finished” side of the fence shall face the perimeter of the lot rather than the interior of the lot. (3) Compatibility of Materials along a Single Lot Side All fencing or wall segments located along a single lot side shall be composed of a uniform style and colors compatible with other parts of the fence and with the associated buildings. (4) Landscape Screening All fences and walls exceeding four feet in height and located within 15 feet of a public street right-of-way in all districts, or as otherwise required by this ordinance, shall be supplemented with landscape screening in accordance with the following standards to soften the visual impact of the fence or wall. (a) Shrubs Required One evergreen shrub shall be installed for every fifteen linear feet of fence or wall, on the side of the fence or wall facing the public street right-of-way. Shrubs shall meet the size standards of Section 4.1(C)(2) Planting Standards, and may be installed in a staggered, clustered, grouped, or linear fashion. CHAPTER 4: FINISHING STANDARDS Section 4.4 Exterior Lighting Subsection (A) Purpose Page 232 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance (b) Substitution of Understory Trees One understory or ornamental tree may be substituted for every three evergreen shrubs provided that the tree meets the size standards of Section 4.1(C)(2) Planting Standards. (c) Integration with other Required Landscaping Required landscape screening for fences or walls may be integrated into the landscaping required for vehicular use area screening or perimeter buffers, provided the standards in Section 4.1 Landscaping and Screening Standards, are maintained. (5) Maintenance Required Every fence or wall must be maintained in a condition of reasonable repair and shall not be allowed to become and remain in a condition of disrepair or danger or constitute a nuisance. Fences or walls in a state of disrepair may be removed by the City as provided by Minnesota Statutes. The cost of removing fences may be levied against the property as a special assessment. 4.4 Exterior Lighting (A) Purpose The purpose of this section is to regulate light spillage and glare to ensure the safety of motorists and pedestrians, and to ensure lighting does not adversely affect land uses on adjacent properties. More specifically, this section is intended to: (1) Regulate Exterior Lighting to Mitigate Adverse Impacts Regulate exterior lighting to assure that excessive light spillage and glare are not directed at adjacent properties, neighboring areas, and motorists; (2) Ensure Proper Insulation Ensure that all site lighting is designed and installed to maintain adequate lighting levels on site while limiting negative lighting impacts on adjacent lands; and (3) Provide Security Provide security for persons and land. CHAPTER 4: FINISHING STANDARDS Section 4.6 Underground Utilities Subsection (J) District Regulations Page 252 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance (iii) Except as provided by window, changeable copy, or temporary signs in this ordinance, individual tenants of a multiple occupancy building within a commercial or industrial zoning district shall not display separate wall, canopy, or marquee signs unless the tenant's business has an exclusive exterior entrance and subject to the following requirements: 1. Each sign shall be limited to the maximum wall sign size permitted in the applicable zoning district provisions in Section 4.5(J). 2. The sign shall be located only on the exterior wall of the tenant space to which the sign permit is issued, but are not required to face a public street. 3. A comprehensive sign plan is submitted that includes all of the following information: a. A site plan to scale showing the location of lot lines, buildings, structures, parking areas, existing and proposed signs, and any other physical features of the area included within the proposed comprehensive sign plan. b. Elevations to scale of buildings included within the comprehensive sign plan including the location of existing or proposed wall, canopy, or marquee signs. c. To scale plans for all existing and proposed signs of any type included within the comprehensive sign plan indicating area, dimensions, height, materials, colors, and means of illumination (if any). 4. No permit shall be issued for a new or replacement sign for an individual tenant except upon a determination by the Community Development Department that it is consistent with the approved comprehensive sign plan. 4.6 Underground Utilities All utilities within or serving new development [e.g. cable television, electrical (excluding transformers), gas, sewer, telephone, and water lines] shall be placed underground. CHAPTER 5: USE STANDARDS Section 5.3 Accessory Use Standards Subsection (C) Table of Permitted Accessory Uses City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 369 (3) Table of Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures TABLE 5-4: ACCESSORY USES BY DISTRICT Use Types “P” = Permitted “C” = Conditionally Permitted “I” = Interim Permitted Base Zoning Districts Additional Requirements A O R A R 1 R 2 T N R 3 R 4 M H B 1 B 2 B 3 B 4 C C D I B C I 1 I 2 Accessory Dwelling Unit P P P P P 5.3(D)(1) Accessory Building – minor P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P 5.3(D)(2) Accessory Building – major P P P P P P P C P P P P P P P P 5.3(D)(3) Adult Use – accessory C 5.3(D)(4) Agricultural Buildings P 5.3(D)(5) Automated Teller Machines (ATMs) P P P P P P P P 5.3(D)(6) Automobile Repair – Major C 5.3(D)(7) Automobile Repair – Minor C C 5.3(D)(8) Boarder(s) P P P 5.3(D)(9) Bulk Fuel Sales/Storage P P P C C C 5.3(D)(10) Cocktail Room (Retail Sales Accessory to Micro- Distillery) C C C C C C 5.3(D)(11) Co-located Wireless Telecommunications Antennae C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C 4.13(E) Commercial Canopies P P P P P P P P 5.3(D)(12) Commercial Transmission/ Reception Antennae/ Structures C C C C C C 4.13(D) Donation Drop-off Containers P P 5.3(D)(13) Drive-Through Services P P P C P P P 5.3(D)(14) Entertainment/Recreation – Outdoor Commercial C C C C 5.3(D)(15) Fences or Walls P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P 4.3 Greenhouse/Conservatory (non-commercial) P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P 5.3(D)(16) Heliports C C C C C 5.3(D)(17) Home Occupations P P P P P P P P P P 5.3(D)(18) Indoor Food / Convenience Sales P P P P P P P P 5.3(D)(19) CHAPTER 5: USE STANDARDS Section 5.3 Accessory Use Standards Subsection (D) Additional Specific Standards for Certain Accessory Uses City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance Page 371 TABLE 5-4: ACCESSORY USES BY DISTRICT (cont.) Use Types “P” = Permitted “C” = Conditionally Permitted “I” = Interim Permitted Base Zoning Districts Additional Requirements A O R A R 1 R 2 T N R 3 R 4 M H B 1 B 2 B 3 B 4 C C D I B C I 1 I 2 Wind Energy Conversion System, Commercial C C C C C 5.3(D)(35) Wind Energy Conversion System, Non-commercial C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C 5.3(D)(36) Wireless Telecommunications Support Structures C C C C C C C 4.3(E) 4.3(F) (D) Additional Specific Standards for Certain Accessory Uses (1) Accessory Dwelling (a) Accessory dwelling units are permitted only on lots with single-family detached dwellings. (b) No more than one accessory dwelling unit per lot is permitted. (c) Detached accessory dwellings shall be architecturally compatible with the principal dwelling. (d) Occupants of accessory dwelling units are limited to the following: (i) Family members of the person occupying the principal structure. Family members include parents, children, siblings, grandparents, aunts, uncles, and cousins of an occupant of the primary structure. (ii) Employee of the occupant of the principal structure whose employment is directed to the principal structure and/or the associated land area of the principal structure. (iii) Employee who provides medical and/or personal care services to an occupant of the primary structure. (e) Accessory dwelling units shall be positioned in one of the following locations: (i) Within the principal structure (e.g. a lower level apartment); (ii) Attached to the principal building; (iii) Detached and behind the principal structure as a freestanding building or above a detached outbuilding. CHAPTER 5: USE STANDARDS Section 5.3 Accessory Use Standards Subsection (D) Additional Specific Standards for Certain Accessory Uses Page 372 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance (f) Attached accessory dwelling units shall adhere to the following: (i) The accessory dwelling unit must be attached to the principal structure and have an operative interconnecting door with the principal structure. (ii) Access to the unit shall only be from the side or rear yard of the principal structure. (g) Detached accessory dwelling units shall adhere to the following: (i) The detached accessory dwelling unit shall be a minimum of six (6) feet from the principal structure. (ii) The accessory dwelling unit must be located in the same base zoning district as the principal structure. (h) The use of manufactured homes, travel trailers, campers, tractor trailers, or similar vehicles as an accessory dwelling unit shall be prohibited. (i) An accessory dwelling unit shall have a floor area of at least 300 square feet and shall not exceed 25 percent of the floor area in the principal structure. (j) At least one, but no more than two, off-street parking spaces shall be provided for an accessory dwelling unit (in addition to the required off-street parking serving the principal use). (k) Accessory dwelling units shall not be sold apart from the principal structure. (l) Accessory dwelling units shall not include home occupations. (2) Accessory Building – Minor (a) Minor accessory buildings do not require a building permit, but shall comply with all applicable zoning regulations. (b) In the M-H district, one minor accessory building for storage of equipment and refuse is permitted for each manufactured home provided the accessory building can meet all required setbacks, and is designed of weather resistant material that will enhance the general appearance of the lot. CHAPTER 5: USE STANDARDS Section 5.4 Temporary Uses Subsection (E) Specific Standards for Temporary Uses Page 394 City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance TABLE 5-6: TEMPORARY USES & STRUCTURES Temporary Use or Structure Allowable Duration (per site) Permit(s) Required Additional Requirements Temporary Structure (cont.) Temporary Sign 120 days per year Yes Sec 4.5(I) Temporary Storage in a Portable Container 30 days per year Yes Sec 5.4(E)(6) Tents, Canopies, Tarp Garages, and Hoop Buildings 30 days per year Yes Sec 5.4(E)(7) Temporary Sale Farmer’s Market Continuous; up to 5 months per year on a single site Yes Sec 5.4(E)(8) Garage/Yard Sale 4 days per event; 3 events total per calendar year No Sec 5.4(E)(9) Seasonal Sales 60 days per permit; 120 days per calendar year maximum term Yes Sec 5.4(E)(7) & Sec 5.4(E)(11) Temporary Merchant See Title 3, Chapter 10 of City Code Wayside Stands See Title 3, Chapter 10 of City Code Special Events Special Events See Title 3, Chapter 10 of City Code (E) Specific Standards for Temporary Uses (1) Construction Dumpster (a) The placement of a temporary construction dumpster or other trash receptacle within a public right-of-way or other site owned by the City shall be subject to standards in the Monticello City code as may be applicable. (b) Temporary trash receptacles or dumpsters located outside public rights-of way are not required to obtain a temporary use permit, but shall comply with the following standards: (i) Be located to the side or the rear of the site, to the maximum extent practicable; (ii) Be located as far as possible from lots containing existing development; (iii) Not be located within a floodplain or otherwise obstruct drainage flow; (iv) Not be placed within five feet of a fire hydrant or within a required landscaping area; and (v) Be located outside of any required tree protection fencing and the dripline of existing trees. Planning Commission Agenda: 06/06/2017 1 3A. Consideration to Appoint a Planning Commission Representative to a Sub- Committee for the Adaptive Re-use or Sale of the Ellison Property. (JO/AS) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Planning Commission asked to appoint a representative to a sub-committee established by the City Council to analyze and evaluate options for the adaptive re-use or sale of the Ellison property. The Ellison property is located at 707 West Broadway in Monticello. The property was offered to the City as donation by the family ownership, including the contents. The Ellison family has a long history, including that of civic organization and engagement, within the community. The Council has requested that a member of the Planning Commission serve on the sub-committee, which will evaluate potential options moving forward. The committee would be charged with conducting a study on the feasibility of keeping and maintaining the building and property in support of the public good. Following is a list of elements of the study:  Research and identify uses for the property that result in a public benefit  Determine cost to update home and property to a level sufficient to support uses  Obtain assistance from a paid architect or other consultants as determined by the committee  Identify and acquire funding sources – grants, donations etc. supporting cost to update home  Identify annual cost of operation and maintenance along with revenue sources  Governance -- identification of committee or parties responsible for managing the facility operation, grounds and its contents.  Make a recommendation to the City Council as to feasibility. Is the public best served by selling the property or should it be kept for an adaptive re-use? B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Motion to appoint Commissioner ________________ to the Ellison Property sub- committee. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: None D. SUPPORTING DATA: City Council Agenda Item, May 22nd, 2017 City Council Special Meeting Minutes, May 8th, 2017 Planning Commission Agenda: 06/06/2017 1 3B.Consideration of preliminary comment and feedback on the draft Downtown Small Area Plan.(AS) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: The Downtown Small Area Plan has been evolving over the last 5 months and was recently presented in draft form to a joint workshop of the Planning Commission, City Council, Economic Development Authority and Parks Commission. At this time, staff is seeking any additional feedback or questions of the Commission as related to the plan draft. Comments will be forwarded to the consultant in anticipation of a formal public hearing and review on July 11th, 2017. The Downtown Small Area Plan will be considered an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan if adopted by the City and as such, requires a public hearing. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: No action required. Staff is requesting preliminary comment at this time. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: None. D. SUPPORTING DATA: A.Draft Downtown Small Area Plan, including: 1.Plan Document 2.Market Context 3.Retail Vitality City of Monticello Small Area PlanMonticello, MNDraft Report as of May 26, 2017 Prepared for: The City of MonticelloPrepared by:Cuningham Group Architecture, Inc. AcknowledgementsConsultant TeamTable of ContentsExecutive Summary 3Background and Purpose 1Character Areas 2Frameworks 3Background 7Demographics 5Market and Development Context 6 Retail Vitality 7Physical Analysis 8Public Process 9Goals and Objectives 12Project Goals 11Character Areas 14 Riverfront 13 Broadway 1 4 Walnut and Cedar Street 16Pine Street 18Frameworks 22Frameworks: Purpose 23Frameworks: Parks and Open Spaces 23Frameworks: Circulation and Access 24Frameworks: Land Use and Development 25Implementation 22Implementation 27City CouncilBrian Stumpf, Mayor Jim DavidsonBill FairCharlotte Gabler Lloyd HilgartCuningham GroupTangible consulting ServicesEconomic Development AuthorityBill Demeules, PresidentBill Tapper, Vice PresidentSteve Johnson, TreasurerJim Davidson, Council RepresentativeLloyd Hilgart, Council RepresentativeTracy HinzJon MorphewPlanning CommissionBrad Fyle, ChairJohn AlstadSam Murdoff Marc SimpsonLucas WynneCharlotte Gabler, Council LiaisonPlanning CommissionJack GregorNancy McCaff rey (Vice Chair)Larry Nolan (Chair)Tim StalpesBrian StollBill Fair, Council LiaisonSteering CommitteeCharlotte GablerJim DavidsonTracy HinzSteve JohnsonMarc SimpsonDon RoberstLarry NolanMarcy AndersonLisa ChernickTom Turner John and Lucy Murray How does the Plan Balance Flexibility with PredictabilityTh e Plan describes a Vision for Downtown as a lively place with pedestrian scaled spaces and building. Th e Plan favors human scaled spaces over vehicular scaled spaces; multiple small investments over single large investments and coordinated actions over individual directions. Th e Plan is based on time-tested approaches to town building and urban design. Th is vision is described in words and illustrations throughout the document. Generally, the Character Area Section uses illustrative drawings to describe the feel and image of a place while Frameworks section generally uses conceptual diagrams that convey broad ideas and concepts. Together, the Plan gives directions for how to arrange buildings, infrastructure and open space so the resulting ensemble is consistent with the Vision. Th e use of both illustrative, precise, and diagrammatic illustrations is intentional in an eff ort to create predictability and off er fl exibility. Th is is a long range plan that relies on a multitude of investors working in a coordinated manner. Th erefore the correct balance of predictability and fl exibility is important because a balance of predictability and fl exibility attracts investment while the lack of predictability and fl exibility repels investment. Adoption of this Plan by City Council is intended to be a strong statement of predictability because it sets in motion several public actions designed to implement the Vision of the Plan. So, while the Plan in locations, is exact and precise, it recognizes that the end result may or may not look exactly like the illustrations because individual investors and developers will interpret the Plan slightly diff erent. Each adding their own expertise and nuance to the Plan Th is is encouraged because it will add richness and nuance to the end result. Executive Summary 1 Become a River TownImprove Pine Street for All Users Encourage Small and Medium Scaled InvestmentsShift the Center of Town to Walnut and Broadway Background and PurposeGoalsTh e purpose of this Plan is to attract and direct investments on the core blocks of Downtown Monticello, MN over the next 10 years. Th e Plan advocates for solidifying Downtown as the heart of the community with a series of coordinated public and private investments. Together, these investments will create a human-scaled environment that encourages gathering, socializing, visiting and enjoying on a daily basis - throughout the year. Th e improvements outlined in this Plan aim to build on the unique qualities of Monticello to make the Downtown yet more attractive to those who have chosen to live and do business in the community. Specifi cally, the Plan seeks to promote Broadway Street as a storefront district with restaurants and specialty retail, celebrate the River for its recreational, connective and economic qualities, reinvigorate a downtown housing market with multiple, appropriately scaled, infi l projects, and improve the experience of Pine Street for all users.Th e Plan is ambitious, but achievable over the next 10 years. Upon completion, approximately 500 new units of housing, new restaurants overlooking the river, unique retail and services on Broadway (CSAH 75), will be added to Downtown Monticello. Primary projects to be completed within fi ve years include : redevelopment of Block 52, Walnut Street connection to River Street and infi l housing on Walnut Street. Implementation of this Plan will create two legacies. Th e fi rst will be a revitalized Downtown with an economy and attractions that benefi t all residents of Monticello. Equally important, however to the physical improvements described above will be the legacy of new partnerships and civic cooperation that are essential to and will result from implementations. Th e ideas set forth in this Plan come from the vested interest of the Monticello community. Th e realization of these ideas rely on a coordinated, cooperative, and active public sector working in tandem with an entrepreneurial private sector Th e result will be a lively Downtown for all in Monticello, a place that embodies both its history and future aspirations. Pine StreetWalnut StBroadwayCity of Monticello Small Area Plan | Executive Summary 2Character Area: Pine StreetTh e community will reclaim Pine Street by maintaining it’s width and adding pedestrian amenities and local serving commercial uses. Character AreasTh e Plan divides the study area into four diff erent Character Areas. Th e purpose of this is to create sub-areas in downtown, each with its own identity and purpose and direction. Th e character areas are developed based on their context and their future role in the downtown. Typically each character area is a mix of uses, but also has a dominant use. Character Area: BroadwayMonticello’s Main Street will transition over time from a street with primarily services, to one with unique retail and restaurants. Character Area: RiverfrontA redesigned Park with an amphitheater and better relationship to Downtown will help connect the River to DowntownCharacter Area: Walnut StreetWalnut and Cedar Streets will fi ll in with new housing (2-4 stories) that adds to the market strength of downtown and provides additional housing choices for new and existing residents of Monticello. Th eir intersections with Broadway will be improved to make it easier to walk to the Riverfront Illustrative Master PlanTh e Plan above describes long term build out of the core blocks of Downtown Monticello. DACit’ idthABCDBCity of Monticello Small Area Plan | Executive Summary Walnut StCedar StBroadway3rd StreetPine StreetRiver Street Existing BuildingsNew Buildings 3 FrameworksFramework: Open Space and Parks• Improve Riverfront Parks to accommodate more programming and events• Redesign Walnut Street and River Street to allow for park expansion and events• Convert vacant lots on Broadway to small pocket parks• Utilize islands for additional park space• Create pedestrian refuges or enhanced building entry ways on the corners of blocks along Pine Street• Enliven open spaces with public art wherever possible Framework: Access and Circulation• Emphasize connectivity throughout the Core, with pedestrian and bike friendly streets, a complete sidewalk system, and connectivity to the in-town neighborhoods. • Promote a “complete streets” policy that balances the needs of all users in the Downtown.• Manage and improve the grid system to support connectivity and access throughout Downtown • Work with MinnDOT to improve Pine Street for users of Downtown Monticello, including additional signals, maintaining the River Street signal and supporting for an additional river crossing• Improve pedestrian crossings of Broadway at Walnut and Cedar to improve access to the Riverfront• Reconnect Walnut Street with River StreetFramework: Development and Land Use• Riverfront District with destination restaurant and entertainment uses• Broadway District with shopfront retail and restaurant uses beneath housing and offi ces• In-town neighborhoods extend to Walnut and Cedar Street with new infi ll housing 2-4 stories (apartments and townhouses)Land Use, Open Space and Transportation are the three frameworks that organize and defi ne the physical environment. As with systems in the human body, each must function independently - and together with - the others. If one fails, they all fail. Th is is why it is important to understand frameworks as individual systems that must function as part of a single Downtown. Th e Plan is also divided into frameworks in order to allow diff erent agencies, departments, and investors act in concert with each other. Th is will help ensure public and private investments are coordinated, less risky, and more publicly acceptable. How is This Plan Related to the Embracing Downtown Plan and the Comprehensive Plan? In 2010, the City of Monticello completed the “Embracing Downtown Plan”, a guide to redevelopment of downtown Monticello. Th e full area considered to be “Downtown Monticello”, or the “Central Community District” extends from Interstate I-94 at its southern boundary to the Mississippi River in the north, and generally from Cedar Street on the east to Maple Street on the west. Th e Embracing Downtown Plan was adopted as an appendix to the Comprehensive Plan, and included three supporting documents, a Design Guideline, Transportation Analysis, and Market Analysis. Changes in the retail marketplace overall, and more specifi cally market changes and reinvestments in downtown Monticello, have created a need to develop a new planning perspective for the core blocks of the downtown.Th e Downtown Small Area Study document therefore serves as an update to the 2008 Monticello Comprehensive Plan and to the Embracing Downtown Plan for a specifi c portion of the downtown. Similar to the Embracing Downtown plan, it is proposed as an appendix to the Comprehensive Plan, although the primary goal will be recommended for insertion directly into the “Downtown” portion of the Land Use Chapter of the plan. For the geographic area encompassed by the Downtown Small Area Plan, the Downtown Small Area plan supercedes the 2010 Embracing Downtown plan. While the three supporting documents to the Embracing Downtown plan continue to inform the Comprehensive Plan and Small Area plan, where the Downtown Small Area plan provides specifi c guidance, the standards therein prevail. As a fi nal note, for the geographic area outside the Downtown Small Area plan boundary, the Embracing Downtown Plan still applies.Character AreasOpen Space and ParksAccess and CirculationDevelopment and land UseCity of Monticello Small Area Plan | Executive Summary Background 5City of Monticello Small Area Plan | Background DemographicsDemographicsIntroduction Monticello is a center of growth, and a local service center, for the surrounding areas. In recent years, Monticello’s growth has largely come in the form of single family homes and apartment development at the edges of the City, and in surrounding areas, as well as retail development oriented to Interstate 94. Th is is true, even though developable land exists in the heart of the downtown area.Downtown Monticello off ers a distinctive environment for housing and retail development. Th e beautiful Mississippi River, with public parks along its banks, serves as the northern border of downtown. Th e River is only two blocks from the storefront district along Broadway Street, the historic center of town.Downtown is compact. Th e interstate highway is only 6 blocks to the south of Broadway Street, with a Cub Foods and other stores alongside it. Th e City’s marquee public facilities—its community center and library—are only three to four blocks south of Broadway Street. Th is is an Population Growth (2000-2015)St. MichaelSauk RapidsBuff aloOtsegoElk RiverWright County40%80%120%MonticelloMinnesotaMedian Household IncomeSt. MichaelSauk RapidsBuff aloOtsegoElk RiverWright County$60,000$40,000$20,000$80,000$100,000MonticelloMinnesotaPopulation Growth: Monticello has experienced signifi cant growth over the past years, attracting new households even through the course of the recent economic recession. Median Household Income:According to the US Census Bureau, the median household income in Monticello is $70,254. Th is is above the state average, whose median income is $61,492.Housing CharacteristicsMonticello has a more diverse range of housing options then many comparison cities. Just 54% of Monticello’s housing units are single-family homes. It off ers more townhomes, apartments, and mobile homes than other cities in Wright County. Nevertheless, there is a culture of homeownership. Around 70% of Monticello households own their home—a high rate considering the diversity of housing types. Homes are on the modest side, with an average value of about $160,000—a result which is infl uenced by the greater than average number of owner-occupied mobile homes and townhomes in Monticello. Housing Unit by TenureSt. MichaelSauk RapidsBuff aloOtsegoElk RiverWright County60%40%20%80%100%MonticelloMinnesotaHousing Unit by TypeSt. MichaelSauk RapidsBuff aloOtsegoElk RiverWright County60%40%20%80%100%MonticelloMinnesotamobile home and otherapartment (> 10 units)apartment (< 10 units)townhouse/condominiumsingle family homeTh e information on this page and the following two pages is summarized from the companion document - Demographics and Market Context and Retail Vitality Study conducted by Tangible Consulting Services. Th is report and can be downloaded on-line at ___________. 4,2861,1655,294Employment and Commuting Due to Monticello’s location relative to the larger cities of St. Cloud and the Twin Cities, it’s not surprising that many residents of Monticello work outside the city. Of the 6,459 employed residents of Monticello, 82% work outside of Monticello.Monticello is not just a bedroom community though. It off ers roughly 5,400 jobs, and provides employment to around 4,300 people who live outside the city. Major employers include Xcel Energy and Cargill.unusually strong collection of attractive off erings within the walkable center of a small city.Downtown Monticello also has conditions that serve as deterrents to new development. Th e width of Pine Street, and the traffi c it carries, serve to bisect the downtown into east and west downtown neighborhoods. Most Broadway Street buildings are occupied, but many of the buildings are business offi ces rather than stores or restaurants that serve walk-up customers. And some buildings and storefronts are in visible need of improvements. Parts of downtown are dominated by surface parking lots, which give a sense of emptiness, and convey a lack of energy and activity.On balance, downtown Monticello has great promise for attracting development, and revitalizing its storefront retail, in ways that will build on its historic role as the heart of the City. 6City of Monticello Small Area Plan | Background1964 - 19801981-19901991-20002001-2017 Market and Development ContextResidential Market ContextApartment ConstructionAverage Multifamily Rent (psf)Vacancy Rate Multifamily Units2012 2013 2014 2015 2016$.90$1.00$1.102012 2013 2014 2015 20164%5%6%7%Residential MarketTh e housing market context matters for the prospects of attracting new housing to Monticello’s downtown. Similar to the housing market in the US at large, apartment rents have been rising in Monticello over the past fi ve years, and the vacancy rate has declined—both of which are indicators of demand. However, average rents in early 2016, in existing apartment buildings tracked by Costar, were only around $1.00 per square foot. Rents of around $2.00 or more per square foot are needed to support new construction, in the absence of public subsidy. Th is high demand, low rent, scenario is common in small cities. It raises the question whether new housing will be able to achieve the rents it needs to support construction costs. In Monticello, this question has been partly answered by the development of Monticello Crossings, in the southeastern part of the City. Monticello Crossings is a market rate apartment development of 210 dwelling units, which has been built in two or three phases. Th e developer’s expectations have been met by the development, in terms of meeting its rent and absorption targets. Tenants value the newer apartment product, which is not available elsewhere in Monticello, and have been willing to pay rents that are signifi cantly higher than the rents in the existing older apartment buildings. Th e success of this development is an indicator that new apartment development in downtown Monticello may also fi nd a market—although the higher costs and risks associated with building downtown would probably mean that public fi nancial support would be needed.Certain developers focus on new housing development in small city downtowns. We interviewed three such developers (along with two others with a diff erent professional focus, but who have a deeper familiarity with Monticello), and they affi rmed that downtown Monticello has many of the characteristics that they would look for in locating a new development. Th e natural amenity of the river, and the Broadway Street storefront district, are particularly attractive features. Th ey expressed skepticism about doing mixed use developments, with housing over retail, except in the strongest areas. Th ey said they would look for a strong public partner—to participate fi nancially in the project, and to support the density that would be required to make the project work.Retail Market ContextTh e retail context is important for addressing key questions related to the ongoing viability of the Broadway Street storefront district, and how much additional retail development downtown would be supported.Retail vacancies over the past fi ve years have been declining, which is a general indicator of market strength. However, average retail rents have been more or less holding steady, and there has not been a lot of new construction in recent years.National retail trends are concerning. Store closures, and struggling malls, are a frequent focus of news stories. Internet shopping is taking market share from bricks and mortar retail stores. However, in the long run the population of Monticello and surrounding areas have a lot of room to grow. Th at should more than off set national retail trends, and it should support a modestly expanded footprint of retail stores in downtown Monticello.Th e retail context map illustrates the competitive landscape for Monticello retail. It shows retail areas in neighboring cities, by the scale of retail property. Note that storefront districts such as Broadway Street attract customers by off ering a diff erent type of shopping environment than newer malls. Pedestrian oriented storefront districts, similar to the Broadway Street storefront district, are also noted on the retail context map.Th is research supports an expectation that the property frontage along Pine Street will continue to attract retail store development, over time, as property is ready for development or redevelopment. It also suggests that there is an adequate customer base to support the storefront district along Broadway Street, and that the storefront district could be expanded modestly. However, a large expansion of the storefront district would not be advisable. Retail vibrancy strategies, if pursued assertively and creatively, could greatly improve the condition and success of the storefront district.INCLUDE RETAIL CONTEXT MAP 7City of Monticello Small Area Plan | BackgroundRetail VitalityNational Retail Trends and Context Th e retail landscape is changing rapidly. As lives get busier, people do more shopping online, and when they actually go out to shop people want an experience – it’s about more than just purchasing a product.But traditional, storefront-style retail areas still have something to off er. Th e small spaces they off er are ideal for local businesses and start-ups. Th ey off er a place for businesses that can’t aff ord the rents in newer retail developments, or can’t fi ll the large spaces in auto-oriented strip areas. Stores and restaurants can be social places where customers interact with others. People want to go out to businesses where they see people enjoying themselves, and where they can run into friends and neighbors, while drinking, dining, working out, or purchasing daily items close to home.Th e opportunity for downtown Monticello is to provide people with an experience. A future downtown Monticello may provide a place where many more people are shopping, eating, sitting by the Mississippi River, walking, biking and socializing. In the context of this new national retail reality, downtown Monticello has the bones to be a destination retail area.Retail Vitality Assessment and StrategiesAn assessment of Broadway Street retail conditions was conducted as part of this plan. Selected fi ndings and strategies from that assessment are presented here. Much more detail can be found in the Retail Vitality Background Report, found in the appendix of this plan.Storefront Density. Storefront density is a key metric, because streets that are walkable have numerous shopping and dining choices within a small area. Monticello is fortunate to have a high density of storefronts, compared with retail districts in peer cities.• Strategy recommendation. Establish development guidelines that ensure that fi ne-grained store density is built into any new development in the storefront district.Store mixAn assessment of store types shows that too many storefronts are rented by businesses that don’t contribute to the vibrancy of the area because they don’t have much Business Mix in Storefront DistrictBuff alo (Division / 1st Ave) Madison, WI (State Street) Elk River Main Street)Monticello ( Broadway) 60%40%20%80%100%Monticello (Study Area)Businesses per 500 lineal feetBuff alo (Division / 1st Ave) Madison, WI (State Street) Elk River Main Street)Monticello ( Broadway) 8641012Monticello (Study Area)20Business Mix in Storefront DistrictBuff alo (Division / 1st Ave) Madison, WI (State Street) Elk River Main Street)Monticello ( Broadway)60%40%20%80%100%Monticello (Study Area)Businesses per 500 lineal feetBuff alo (Division / 1st Ave) Madison, WI (State Street) Elk River Main Street)Monticello ( Broadway)8641012Monticello (Study Area)20Business DensityBusiness density is the concentration of businesses in an area. When businesses are concentrated it is easier to walk among them and to visit several during one trip. Higher density of businesses also creates a vibrant environment that can feel busy and active with signs, storefront displays and outdoor seating. Noon - contributingNon retail destinationfood and beverageneighborhood goods and servicesgeneral merchandise, apparel and accessorieswalk-up traffi c. Th ere is also a real lack of food and beverage businesses, which serve as important anchors in many comparison areas.• Strategy recommendation. Initiate a retail recruitment program for the district, which would identify and attract key retail stores and food/beverage businesses, that will be complementary to the existing stores.WalkabilityBroadway Street is highly walkable. Th e buildings extend to the sidewalk and have few gaps between them. Th e streetscaping is a bit dated, but it off ers pedestrian scale lighting and pedestrian refuges. Many of the buildings have large windows that front the street, which draw one’s eyes into the store and enhance the ease of walking by. Th e greatest challenge to Broadway Street’s walkability is the automobile traffi c which serves as a barrier to circulating comfortably through the district• Strategy recommendations. Add stop signs and crosswalks at Broadway and Walnut. Evaluate and improve the Pine Street crossing from a pedestrian perspective.Building ConditionsBuilding conditions in downtown Monticello vary greatly. Deferred maintenance is evident. Building renovation is expensive, even if will usually be more cost eff ective than wholesale redevelopment. In buildings that are occupied and cash-fl owing, it can be diffi cult to justify tackling these improvements on a strictly market basis. Some outside fi nancial incentives will probably also be needed to advance this goal. In the short run, some public support for improving facades may off er the most bang for the buck.• Strategy recommendation. Establish a façade improvement programs that off ers fi nancial support for investments that improve the visual appearance of buildings and district identity.Visual IdentityMany successful retail streets have recognizable visual themes that make them memorable and vivid. Th e buildings in downtown Monticello vary greatly in style, size and condition. Treatments of windows, signage and displays varies greatly as well. Patterns that establish a sense of identity are lacking.• Strategy recommendation. Businesses on Broadway Street could agree to use signage improvements as an initial vehicle for improving the perceived condition of the district, and presenting some common visual elements (color, pattern, shape, creativity, etc) that build a sense of identity.Marketing and ActivationTh e Broadway Street district can be animated via marketing, events, and te activation of public spaces. Promotion programs are most successful when there is committed ownership by the business community. Th ey can have endless forms and variations, limited only by the creativity of those involved. Th e physical environment can also be animated by sidewalk merchandise displays, sidewalk seating, and the creation of public space and outdoor seating between buildings• Strategy recommendations. Organize building and business owner interest, within an existing organization or a new one, to pursue a coordinated and creative retail vibrancy program on Broadway Street. Activate sidewalks and new plaza areas as much as possible—so that the vibrancy of the area is visible to passersby. 8City of Monticello Small Area Plan | Background Physical AnalysisSaint CloudMinneapolisMonticelloOriginal Plat of MonticelloTh e original plat of Monticello consisted of a square (300’x 300’) aligned to the river. Generally the 60’ lots faced north and south. Broadway was distinguished from other streets with a narrower lot dimension - accommodating mercantile and main street buildings. Monticello in the RegionMonticello (“little hill”) sits on the Mississippi River between Saint Cloud and Minneapolis. It was settled at this location because the river is relatively shallow and calm and it made for an easy river crossing. Its connection to the region changed dramatically when I-94 was completed in ____ . With two exits and an improved bridge across the Mississippi River, Monticello has become a crossroads community. Existing Conditions (publicly owned properties outlined in red)Existing Conditions: Buildings by useCommunity and PublicHousingCommercialEmploymentBlock 52Block 52Block 34Block 34Pine StreetWalnut StreetPine StreetCedar StreetLocal RoadsTh e local road network resembles the original plan of the City - with square blocks and a dense network of streets. Over time, the integrity of the grid has been slightly eroded with superblocks and street closings that respond to high volume arterials. Parks and Open SpacesTh e City boasts a strong park system that off ers residents access to a series of varied parks. In the study area, there are three riverfront parks - East Bridge Park, West Bridge Park and Front Street Park. Regional RoadsOver time, Pine Street and Broadway have become regional roads. Th e growth of these roads have connected the City to the Region, but they have also had major impacts on local connectivity and land use. 9 Public ProcessCity of Monticello Small Area Plan | BackgroundPedestrian EnvironmentTh e pedestrian experience at street level is a key determinant to creating a successful Downtown. Th e diagram above indicates the quality of the environment along each block face from poor to excellent. Th ere are many factors that make up the overall experience including the condition of the sidewalk, traffi c alongside the sidewalk, and the level of activity or comfort the adjacent property provides for the pedestrian. StrengthsDuring the public process participants were asked to place green dots on the areas of Downtown that they deemed were the “strongest” or the most beloved. Th is included: »the Community Center and Library »Broadway »Th e Riverfront ParksWeaknessesDuring the public process participants were asked to place red dots on the areas of Downtown that they deemed were the “weakest.” Th is included: »the Pine Street Broadway intersection »the appearance of Downtown upon arriving from the north. »vacant lots and large parking areas. »appearance of blighted buildings and disinvestment on Broadway east of Pine Street. ComfortablePoorOKINCLUDE POSTCARDS Goals and Objectives 1111City of Monticello Small Area Plan | Goals and Objectives Project GoalsPine StreetWalnut StBroadwayShift the Center and Double Down on BroadwayOver time the travel and use patterns of Downtown have changed - altering the overall experience of downtown. Up until 1960, most travel was local and streets were relatively narrow and comfortable. However as the region grew Monticello became a crossroads - thereby burdening Broadway and Pine Street with high volumes of through traffi c and widened streets. Today, the Broadway / Pine Street intersection is one of the most traveled intersection in the region. Whereas that quality makes for great visibility, it also makes for a poor pedestrian experience and poor access to adjacent properties. Broadway, west of Pine Street is relatively lightly travelled and unlike Broadwway east of Pine Street it has retained its pedestrian scale. Furthermore, the City has developed successful parks at the end of Locust Street and Walnut Street. Th erefore, an opportunity exists to fully extend Walnut Street down to the park and grow the downtown mercantile district towards the riverfront along Broadway. Engage and love the riverfront. Go beyond the SwanGreat places have unique assets that diff erentiate them from others. Monticello has the Mississippi River. Th is defi ning feature can be further utilized to the benefi t of Monticello residents and businesses. A riverfront that is well connected with blue and green trails, is publicly accessible and is activated throughout the day and the year can become a defi ning feature for the City and an important driver of economic activity. Lots of Small Investments, a few medium ones and just and just one or two big ones Monticello, despite it’s growth, is proud to be a small town. Small towns develop charm and character through a series of small incremental investments that together add up to help a place become memorable and beloved. Simple investments such as new awnings, improved lighting and well maintained landscaping can make a big impression. Small buildings that fi t on vacant parcels or otherwise underutilized land can happen quickly - adding vitality to a community. By promoting a high quantity of smaller investments, the Downtown will become more diverse, more lively, and more responsive and adaptable to changes in the market place. A few medium scaled investments, warranted by a strong market or a strategic need, are important and valuable. But they should be carefully scaled and implemented so as to not disrupt the fragile fabric of the small town. Improve the Pine Street Experience for EveryoneWhether passing through Monticello along Pine Street (TH 25), trying to cross Pine Street by foot, or going to a business along Pine Street, the experience of using Pine Street is generally a negative one. Th e environment of Pine Street projects a negative image and it is a divider between the east and west side of the town. Whereas Pine Street will always be a heavily travelled street, it does not need to be a negative experience. Th e community can take it back, claiming it for more appropriate development types, making it safer, more pleasant, and attractive for all users. Character Areas 13RiverfrontDespite being a town born on the River the Downtown does not take great advantage of its unique location. Broadway is a block removed from the Riverfront and the main connection to the River, Walnut Street, ends in a staircase. Th e entry experience to Monticello from the north is mundane with vacant properties and a thick wall of trees that obscures potential views to public spaces and DowntownTh e Riverfront Character Area will become a proud new public gathering space for Downtown Monticello that compliments Broadway and the full Monticello Park System. Th e Plan recommends redesigning the riverfront parks so they are more accessible active and fl exible and promoting development that takes advantage of access to the river. A new park will be capable of handling larger crowds for events, and will be more accessible and usable on a daily basis with additional amenities and features designed for everyday use.Th e Plan promotes access to the riverfront by extending Walnut Street to connect to River Street. It will be designed as a multi-use street that can be closed for farmers markets, gatherings, and other events. Th e Plan recommends and leveraging public property of Block 52 to create a new signature development with market rate housing and a destination restaurant or brewery overlooking the park and the river. Public parking is maintained on Block 52 and added to River Street. City of Monticello Small Area Plan | Character AreasSite Sections Th rough Block 52 and West Bridge Park existingRiver St Block 52 BroadwayBridge ParkPine StWalnut StCedar StRiver StBroadway4th Street 3rd Street Perspective from Walnut street, looking across a redesigned West Bridge ParkCADDDWalnutRiver StAFCEBRedesign Riverfront parks to include more active events and programming in West Bridge Park (amphitheater, splash pad, concessions) and passive uses in east bridge park.Add parking and sidewalks to River StreetReconnect Walnut Street to River Street with a design that allows Walnut Street to be used for events and park expansion.Work with the private sector to create a signature development on Block 52, with market rate housing and a restaurant that overlooks the ParkEncourage new housing surrounding the riverfront parks on vacant and underutilized parcelsMaintain and improve the intersection at River Street and Pine Street.Improve the underpass of Pine Street at the River.Consider a seasonal bridge to the island to provide additional recreational activity to east and west Bridge park FCEABDDPrecedent Images 14 BroadwayBroadway - west of Pine Street - has remained physically intact as Downtown’s primary sto refront district. Broadway is relatively well-maintained and home to several services and community anchors such as the Cornerstone Cafe. However with growth of retail along the highway and elsewhere in town, Broadway is no longer a competitive location for general retail. Th e Plan recommends re-positioning the center of Downtown from the Pine/Broadway intersection to the Broadway/Walnut intersection. Th is will be partially accomplished with intersection improvements that make it easier to cross Broadway at Walnut Street. Th is should include curb extensions, fewer through lanes, clearer crosswalks, blinkers and eventually a four-way stop sign. Th ese improvements will increase the fl ow of pedestrian and bike traffi c to the river and in between stores on both sides of Broadway.Small pocket parks can be developed on vacant lots mid-block on Broadway. Th ese spaces can serve as convenient pedestrian connections between parking areas mid bloc and the sidewalks on Broadway. In addition, they can be small plazas with seating for resting, gathering, and even restaurants if the buildings next to them can be opened up to the pocket parks.New development along Broadway is encouraged if it replicates the scale of existing buildings and shopfronts. Buildings up to three stories, with storefronts located on the sidewalk and doors every 30 feet will fi t in comfortably with existing buildings. Allowances for 10 foot setbacks from the sidewalk to create additional pedestrian amenities (such as seating) are appropriate. te Plan does not recommend additional widening of Broadway. Instead, the Plan recommends working with partners to fi nd other measures to mitigate congestion. DBExisting Proposedcrossing width 75 Feet 63 Feetcrossing timeParking DowntownTh e Plan recommends the following parking strategy »provide on-street parking wherever possible for short-term visitors to Downtown. »provide small public lots on the interior of the core blocks for employees and visitors staying for over an hour. »create a superior system of sidewalks and walkways encourage people to park once downtown and to walk a block or two to their multiple desinatsions downtown. »provide visibility to parking lots, or well designed signage that directs regional visitors to available parking spaces in public lots. Consider “smart signs” that indicate availibility. »monitor occupancy and utilization of parking downtown in order to make adjustments as necesarry. »Adopt a District Parking policy that increases the utilization of existing parking and over time reduces the overall visual impact of parking in the Downtown. Perspective on Broadway, looking west with a pocket park across the streetProposed ExistingCity of Monticello Small Area Plan | Character AreasDModify striping and median on Broadway create a safer pedestrian environment. Small pocket parks on vacant properties that off er respite from Broadway and pedestrian connections to parking in the middle of the blockCurb extensions at Walnut and Broadway to provide space for landscaping, seating, and gatheringBroadwayNew development that replicates the storefront scale currently present on Broadway. New buildings should have fl exible interiors so a main street scale can be accomplished in larger buildings.Facade improvement programs that improve signage, awnings, and general appearance of existing storefrontsDABBCABCEEPine StWalnut StCedar StRiver StBroadway4th Street 3rd Street 15 Broadway Design GuidelinesMassing and Orientation• buildings should generally be between two and four stories with varied roofl ine• all buildings should face onto Broadway• buildings along pocket parks or corners can have a second entrance / orientation to side street or pocket park• buildings should have varied widths with a maximum storefront of 45’. • longer buildings should be articulated in approximately 45’ increments with setbacks, material change or penestration patterning. Facade and Frontage• all buildings should have a storefront or gallery frontage along Broadway• minimum 50% (windows/doors) transparency on ground fl oor• signage integrated with building• base / middle / top articulation for multistory buildings• varied cornice lines that resemble the scale of traditional main street buildings. Building Use and Location• small scale retail, dining, and entertainment uses are required on the ground fl oor.• offi ce, commercial, and housing are permitted on upper fl oors• buildings are located towards the front of the lot, directly on the back of the sidewalk. Public Realm• 10-15’ sidewalks with street trees in grates and curb extensions that reduce the crossing distance along Broadway.• on street parking for convenience and to buff er sidewalk from traffi c• encroachments for seating, signage and display allowed• mid block pocket parks that provide a respite from Broadway and a connection to parking areas located mid block.• parking located on-street and in shared lots mid block Massing and OrientationUse and LocationPublic Realm Facades and FrontagesMassing and OrientationUse and LocationPublic Realm Facades and FrontagesMMPrecedent Images City of Monticello Small Area Plan | Character Areas 16 Primary Recommendations Walnut Street and Cedar StreetWalnut Street and Cedar Street are important corridors to the River as well as transitions between the commercial areas of downtown and the in-town neighborhoods. In order to perform in this capacity, the Plan encourages new housing to infi l vacant lots and eventually for single family housing to transition to medium density housing. Live/work units or small service/production (such as insurance agent or jewelry maker) are permitted. In addition the Plan recommends improvements to the street that will accommodate pedestrian and bike access to the River. Th is includes parallel parking, aligned sidewalks and crosswalks, and curb extensions at Broadway. Walnut S t r e e t Walnut Street Promenade to the RiverPerspective along Walnut Street, looking north towards the River. Pine StWalnut StCedar StProposed Section of Walnut Street8’12’24’8’ 8’12’8’80’ ROWPPBikeBikeRiver StreetBroadwayConvertible StreetDiagonal Parking(existing)Paralell Parking(see section above) 3rd Street4th Street5th Streettracks7th StreetCity of Monticello Small Area Plan | Character AreasDABCCreate a pedestrian promenade to the Riverfront with wide continuous sidewalks and well marked crosswalksInfi ll vacant lots and redevelop underutilized parcels with housing in small apartments or townhouses. Small service or production uses are permitted within these and existing buildings. Encourage new housing to face Walnut and Cedar Street, with multiple doors facing the street. Locate all parking towards the middle of the block, accessed via a rear lane shared with other properties on the block.Encourage small and medium scaled apartments that prioritize pedestrian scale and walkability. DABCERiver StBroadway4th Street 3rd Street 17Facade and Frontage• porches and dooryards are required for all ground fl oor units.• dormers and bay windows are encouraged to create a pedestrian scaled rhythm of the facade• Upper story balconies are encouraged. • Courtyards are permitted along 1/2 of a front property line. Public Realm• 6’-10’ sidewalk, aligned across intersections and along the front of blocks.• on street parking for visitors to Downtown• clearly marked crosswalks to accommodate pedestrian and bike access between the Community Center and the RiverfrontBuilding Use and Location• primarily residential uses between the Civic Center and Walnut Street. Small scale service and home based businesses permitted on corners. • Front of buildings should be located between 10’-15’ feet of front property line and between 5’ and 10’ of side street property line. Massing and Orientation• buildings should be between 2 and 4 stories.• buildings should be primarilly oriented to Walnut Street to create a comfortable pedestrian environment. • Dormers and roof articulations should be used to reduce the scale of buildings if buildings are longer than 100’ in length.Massing and OrientationUse and LocationPublic Realm Facades and FrontagesMassing and OrientationUse and LocationPublic Realm Facades and Frontages Walnut Street and Cedar Street GuidelinesCity of Monticello Small Area Plan | Character AreasPrecedent Images 18Perspective along Pine Street, looking north towards the River. 15’70 ’15’100’ City of Monticello Small Area Plan | Character Areas Pine StreetPine Street (Minnesota State Hwy 25) is an important and heavily travelled roadway in Monticello and Sherburne County. It is one of only two river crossings between Minneapolis and Saint Cloud and it connects to I-94 in Monticello. Th e original plat of Monticello did not foresee the growth of Pine Street and as a result, the steady growth of traffi c along it has had a strong impact on the community. While it connects Monticello to the region, it also divides the community between east and west. Th is Plan recognizes Pine Street as a regional roadway, but seeks to manage it’s impacts as it crosses through Downtown. Th e Plan does not recommend any additional widening and supports additional river crossings that would better serve both Downtown and the region.New development along Pine Street should be regional serving, but locally scaled. Buildings should be located on the corners with pedestrian refuges along Pine Street that improve the appearance and the experience of all along Pine Street. Th e plan discourages additional property access to Pine Street and encourages side street access with through block (north/south) easements. Proposed Section of Pine StreetPine StreetDABCEWork with MnDOT to maintain a 5 lane section(2 through lanes both directions with a center turning lane), do not increase speedsWork with MNDot to improve pedestrian crossings wherever possible, preferably with traffi c signals at 4th Street.Encourage redevelopment on the corners of blocks, with entrances facing the street, and shared parking in the middle of the block.Reduce the impact of parking to pedestrians by minimizing the width to 180’ and buff ering parking from the sidewalk with a low fence and streetscaping. Reduce direct property access to Pine Street and encourage property access from side streets with through block easements.DABCEPine StWalnut StCedar StRiver StBroadway4th Street 3rd Street 19Public Realm• 10’-15’ sidewalk; trees clustered in planters with ground cover or low shrubs.• sidewalks buff ered from parking lots with low wall or hedge. • gateway treatments at River street and 7th Street. Building Use and Location• retail, offi ce or hospitality uses that desire visibility, parking and regional access are encouraged. • buildings located towards front corners of Pine Street blocks.• Parking lots in mid block should not be wider than 180’.Massing and Orientation• buildings should be between 2 and 5 stories.• buildings should be oriented to Pine Street. Secondary entrances can be located on side streets or facing parking lots. If located on the Broadway/Pine Street corner, buildings should be oriented to Broadway.Massing and OrientationUse and LocationPublic Realm Facades and FrontagesMassing and OrientationUse and LocationPublic Realm Facades and FrontagesPine Street GuidelinesCity of Monticello Small Area Plan | Character AreasFacade and Frontage• Primary entrance to building should be clearly visible from Pine Street. • One story base level articulation is encouraged to create a pedestrian scale frontage. • Storefronts on the ground fl oor are encouraged to face Pine Street. If storefronts face mid block parking, there must be pedestrian access to the storefronts.• Corner treatments such as entrances or towers are encourages at the corners of the bocks. Precedent Images 20Block 34 Access WaySurface ParkingBlock 34 Most of the properties on Block 34 are publicly owned. In addition, there are two wells on the block that impact development. Redevelopment is further challenged by limitations on property access created by medians on Broadway and Pine Street. Th e site is attractive for “outbound” retail and the plan recommends such a use to be located in the base of a multi use building on the corner of Pine and Broadway. Pine StreetBroadway Street E4th Street ECedar StreetPine StreetBroadway Street E4th Street ECedar StreetMin: 5-Feet Max:10-FeetMin: 5-Feet Max:15-FeetMin: 5-Feet Max:15-Feet Max:15-FeetMin: 5-FeetPine StreetBroadway Street E4th Street ECedar StreetPine StWalnut StCedar StRiver StBroadway4th Street 3rd Street City of Monticello Small Area Plan | Character AreasFrontage And Ground Floor UsesActive (retail) uses are required at Pine Street and Broadway. Residential frontages are required on Cedar Street. Th e remainder of the block is fl exible. .Setbacks, Pocket Parks & Open SpaceBuildings should defi ne the perimeter of the block with a front facade zone between 5’ and 15’ of the front property line. Th e two wells on site have 50’ setbacks. and shold be incorporated into courtyards or parking areas. Parking & ServicingPrimary access to mid block parking should occur from Cedar Street and 4th Street. Access (right in / right out) is discouraged on Broadway and Pine Street. Flexible FrontageActive FrontageResidential FrontageWell SetbackBuilding SetbackOptionsTh e two illustrations above show potential options for development on Block 34 - both adhering to the guidelines. Th e top illustration shows a development pattern that assumes the property on Cedar Street remains. Residential FrontageActive Frontage 21Blocks 52Block 52 Block 52 is a key block in the Downtown. It is highly visible and it sits on the West Bridge Park. Th e site slopes approximately 15’ from Broadway to River Street. Broadway and Walnut contain mercantile buildings of varying quality. River Street has vacant parcels and underutilized buildings. Access WaySurface ParkingFrontage And Ground Floor UsesActive frontages (high transparency) and uses (retail and restaurants) should be located on Broadway, Walnut, and the west half of River Street. Th e remainder of the block is fl exible - it can have either residential or active frontages. Setbacks, Pocket Parks & Open SpaceBuildings should defi ne the perimeter of the Block. Minor setbacks (5’-10’) for overhangs, seating, and display of goods is permitted on Broadway and Walnut if buildings are redeveloped. A more generous setback is permitted on Pine due to traffi c volumes and access. Attached corner plazas are encouraged on the northwest corner of the block and permitted on the northeast and southeast corners. Parking & ServicingAccess to mid block parking is encouraged on Pine Street and Walnut Street. Parking should be behind buildings with minimum exposure to thePine Street and no exposure to Broadway, River or Walnut Street. Flexible FrontageActive FrontageResidential FrontageWalnut StreetBroadway Street WRiver Street WPine StreetMin: 0-Feet Max:10-FeetMin: 5-Feet Max:10-FeetMin: 0-Feet Max:10-FeetMin: 10-Feet Max: 20-Feet60’30’Walnut StreetBroadway Street WRiver Street WPine StreetWalnut StreetBroadway Street WRiver Street WPine StreetCity of Monticello Small Area Plan | Character AreasBuilding SetbackPocket Park & Open SpaceOptionsTh e two illustrations above show potential options for development on Block 52 - both adhering to the guidelines. Th e top illustration shows new development on Broadway, articulated at a Main Street scale, with a corner plaza and a covered pass through as a form of pocket park. Th e bottom illustration shows a single corner development on Broadway, with a pocket park. Frameworks 23 Frameworks: PurposeLand Use, Open Space and Transportation are the three frameworks that organize and defi ne the physical environment. As with systems in the human body, each must function independently - and together with - the others. If one fails, they all fail. Th is is why it is important to understand frameworks as individual systems that must function as part of a single Downtown. Th e Plan is also divided into frameworks in order to allow diff erent agencies, departments, and investors act in concert with each other. Th is will help ensure public and private investments are coordinated, less risky, and more publicly acceptable. General Approach Th e Land Use Plan promotes a development pattern that recognizes the essential role that Downtowns plays in the communities they serve. Successful Downtowns tend to be places that serve many functions for the full cross section of the community throughout the year and across generations. Th ey are places to gather, eat, live, shop, celebrate, protest, recreate, meet, be entertained, and to visit. Th ey are places that promote social interactions and the unique creative expression of the community. At their best, Downtowns are places that exude pride because they represent the best the community has to off er.In order to promote these ideals, this Plan favors policies, and development patterns that improve downtown for those who currently use it and patterns that support the places that people value. Th erefore, development patterns and land uses in this Plan seek to support the Main Street character of Broadway, the importance of Walnut Street as a promenade to the River, regional and local needs of Pine Street, and the riverfront as the birthplace of the City.Th is Plan also recognizes both the traditional (and still relevant) role of Downtown Monticello as well as the changing nature of small Downtowns throughout the country. Th e Plan focuses less on shopping and retail uses as a core driver to downtown, and more on social Development Patterns that support social interaction, local character, and a compact connected and walkable environment. interaction, healthy living, civic participation, and local character. Physically, the Plan favors compact walkable small town design with a fi ne grained mix of uses. Th e Plan arranges development types and land uses so valued places are supported, and new investments can add to the overall vitality of downtown. Recommendations• create a Center to Downtown that is active throughout he day and into the evening - year round. Th e Walnut / Broadway Intersection should become the heart of this area. • Improve connections to the River by locating uses that benefi t from open spaces and activities associated with the River.• Improve the entry experience from the north.• Maintain a shopfront District along Broadway, west of Pine Street comprised of traditional main street (mercantile) buildings and spaces. • Create development pattern on Pine Street that benefi ts from high visibility and regional access.• Infi ll Walnut Street and Cedar Street with mid scale housing (2-4 stories) that creates an eff ective transition between the in-town neghborhoods and the Downtown. Walnut StreetCedar StreetBroadwayRiver Street3rd Street4th Street Frameworks: Land Use and DevelopmentCommercialMixed-UseSmall Retail OpportunitiesRequired Retail FrontageMulti-Familiy HousingPublicEmploymentMedium Density HousingCity of Monticello Small Area Plan | Frameworks 24East Bridge ParkWest Bridge ParkFront Street ParkWalnut StreetCedar StreetLocust StreetPine StreetBroadwayRiver Street3rd Street4th StreetTo Middle SchoolTo Elementary SchoolBroadwayRiver Street4th Street ParkCemetery Frameworks: Parks and Open SpacesGeneral ApproachParks and Open Space play an important role in distinguishing the Downtown from other areas of Monticello. Unlike much of Monticello where parks are generally programmed for recreational / sports and defi ned by trees and greenery, the parks downtown should focus on gathering and general social interaction as well as planned events. Th erefore, in order to support and enhance the environment for downtown residents and businesses, this Plan expands the defi nition of parks beyond the valued park spaces that are already in use - namely Front Street Park, East and West Bridge Park.Th e Downtown Parks should also take in consideration the needs of new downtown residents and visitors. Upon implementation of this plan, several hundred new residents will be living in the downtown. It is likely that new downtown housing will be more compact and with less outdoor space than typical single family homes. Inevitably this will result in park demands that don’t currently exist. Meeting these needs is a great opportunity to further develop a well designed and well connected park and open space system. Parks, Plazas, and Sidewalks that are lively, safe and pleasant to be in. Recommendations• Redesign East and West Bridge park to include an amphitheater, water feature, riverfront access, picnicking, and additional space for passive park use. • Improve Front Street Park to include improved boat landing and space for nature oriented programming. • Connect the two Bridge Parks with Front Street Park with improved pathways and trails. Design all three parks as a single park with multiple uses. • Provide access to the islands with a seasonal bridge• Create small pocket parks mid block on Broadway to off er plazas that connect to parking lots in the middle of the block.• Redesign Walnut Street between River Street and Broadway as a special street that can be closed and used for festivals and events throughout the year. • Consider all sidewalks for opportunities to enhance greenery and public art. Emphasize Walnut Street, River Street and Broadway as the main pedestrian corridors in Downtown. • Use public art throughout the parks and corridors to distinguish Downtown as a place of cultural expression and celebration.• Work closely with local businesses, residents (new and existing) to ensure local parks and open spaces are appropriately designed and programmed for their varied needs. • Modify the Embracing Monticello Plan that recommends off street bike paths on Pine Street. In lieu of this off -street path, create north south bike access to the river along Walnut and Cedar through a complete streets policy. Encourage bicycle crossing of Pine Street at 4th, River and 7th Street. PlaygroundSeasonal BridgePark OverlookWater FeaturePark Facilities AmphitheaterSledding HillPublic GardensPicnic AreaIllustrative Master Plan: East and West Bridge ParkCommunity ParksNeighborhood ParksPocket ParksConvertible Streets Proposed Bituminous Trail ConnectionsMRT TrailSeasonal BridgeExisting Bituminous TrialPedestrian Promenade to RiverCity of Monticello Small Area Plan | Frameworks 25General Approach Th e design of the streets (and the full right of ways) in downtown have a signifi cant bearing on how downtown functions and feels. Th e rights-of-way in the Downtown should be designed to create a comfortable and safe physical environment that encourages a range of activities and development types. Th e Plan recommendations, therefore, favor a high quality, well-connected, and fl exible street system that facilitates all users of downtown - especially those who are using and not passing through Downtown. With two main roads bisecting downtown, traffi c volumes are relatively high. Th is provides an opportunity to capture additional business downtown, but it also can have a deleterious impact on the pedestrian and business environment in some locations. Recognizing this situation, previous Plans have emphasized Walnut Street as a main pedestrian connection to the River (not Pine Street). Th is Plan supports that idea and off ers several ways in which that can be further achieved. Th is Plan departs from previous Plans in that it also encourages pedestrian activity on streets other than Walnut - this includes, Broadway, Pine Street and Cedar. While the Plan recognizes the regional function of Broadway and Pine, the Plan strives to balance this function with the local needs of community connectivity, aesthetics, pedestrian safety, and multi-modal travel. Successful Downtowns are not just easy to get to, they are pleasant to be in and to stay for multpile reasons. Th erefore, this Plan, discourages future road widenings that would have further negative impacts on pedestrians Downtown - especially along the primary pedestrian corridors and districts. In lieu of road widenings, the Plan champions an well connected and balanced urban street grid system that can be programmed to fl ex and contract as needed to meet all the needs of Downtown. Accomplishing this goal will require a series of smaller interventions (signal timing, street connections, traffi c controls, traffi c calming, time-of-day-parking restrictions, modifi ed property access, etc.) in lieu of wholesale street widening that would likely have a negative physical impact on the built environment of Downtown.Th e Plan also supports a street network where the Level of Service for pedestrians, transit riders, and cyclists are considered on equal terms to those of motorists and delay measurements from modelling are considered as a portion of overall average trip, not in isolation. Recommendations• Connect Walnut Street to River Street• Maintain the River Street / Pine Street signal as the formal entrance to Downtown and an important pedestrian connection across Pine Street.• Add a traffi c signal at 4th and Pine to help balance the grid and turning movements at the Pine / Broadway Intersection. • Modify Walnut / Broadway and Cedar Walnut Broadway intersection to prioritize pedestrian crossings and access to the river. • Narrow the travel lanes on Walnut Street, add parallel parking, where possible and ensure continuous safe and pleasant sidewalks.• Add sidewalks at the perimeter of blocks where they are not currently present• Discourage direct property access to Pine Street; favoring the side streets wherever possible with through-block lanes or easements. • Allow direct property access to Block 52 from Pine Street in order to reduce volumes at the Pine / Broadway intersection.• Discourage deceleration lanes; encourage speeds that do not require them. • Consider traffi c calming at River Street and Locust (or Linn) to prevent excessive speeds. Frameworks: Circulation and AccessA complete network of fl exible streets that favors the needs of resdents, businesses, and visitors. BroadwayWalnut StreetCedar StreetCedar StreetCedar Streetriver Street3rd Street4th StreetImproved Pedestrian CrossingSignalized IntersectionAccess WayInterstate 94Broadway Street (CSAH 75)Add Sidewalks to Complete GridSurface ParkingPedestrian Promenade to RiverPine Street (MN 25)7th StreetCity of Monticello Small Area Plan | Frameworks Implementation 27City of Monticello Small Area Plan | BackgroundIntroductionNo one is served by a plan that sits on the shelf. Implementing this Downtown Monticello Small Area Plan means taking action on several fronts.• Catalytic development projects• Retail vitality strategies• Public realm improvements• Development guidelines for Pine Street, Walnut Street, and Broadway StreetCatalytic Development ProjectsTo change market perceptions of an area, it is advisable to concentrate public investments in development in an area where a new sense of place can emerge. Th at invites a private sector response. For that reason, Monticello is advised to foster a critical mass of catalytic development projects, and a new sense of place, along the Walnut Street corridor. At the north end of the corridor, new development projects would make a fi rm and exciting connection to the Mississippi riverfront. Further south, new development can build a new multifamily neighborhood downtown, easily walkable to a multitude of downtown amenities. New development along Walnut Street reinforces the character of Walnut Street as the walkable spine that connects downtown assets from the stores near the interstate to the Mississippi River and parks. Market research and interviews with developers indicate that Monticello’s downtown will be of interest to the development community. Th e City will nevertheless need to take active steps to capitalize on this interest. An assertive public sector role means consideration of actions like site assembly, public fi nancial support, and other steps. Public fi nancial support will be required to attract new development downtown. Market conditions will not bring new development without it. A note on public fi nancial support for development. Cities need to invest in their own renewal, in order to stay viable, and to prevent certain areas from entering a cycle of decline. But the focus and scale of that investment is an important decision point. For Monticello, maintaining the viability and vibrancy of its downtown is a natural and prudent focus of investment. And providing fi nancial support to a small set of catalytic projects represents a scale of investment that is nicely proportionate to the City’s overall resources. Th ree Catalytic ProjectsTh ree potential catalyst projects are described below, with a recommended approach to implementation for each.Development Site 1—North half of Block 52Th is site is envisioned to be developed as a mixed use development, introducing housing that fronts on the river, and off ering a destination restaurant or other prominent retail attraction. It would create a new buzz for downtown Monticello, and draw customer traffi c that would support the retailers on Broadway Street.Th is site has the potential to be highly attractive for a developer, if certain preconditions are present. Development is most likely if:a) the site can be assembled in single ownership or controlled by a common entityb) there is a commitment to a special street on the Broadway-to-River block of Walnut Streetc) a renowned restaurateur or brewmaster is secured in advance for the signature retail spaced) good traffi c circulation is maintained around the block, and good access is available to surface parking in the block interiore) City and public support is present for development at a reasonable densityf) Public fi nancial support is made availableTh e City will need to play a proactive and assertive role to advance these conditions for success. Development Site 2—South half of block between River and Front StreetsTh is site is a premier location for new housing development, given its proximity to the River and riverfront parks. It is well suited to townhome development, or three story development with underground parking—with the latter likely to be more viable fi nancially. It could have larger units, serving families, or smaller units, serving singles, couples and/or seniors. New households in this location would support downtown retail stores, and contributes to the center of energy and activity at River and Walnut.Developing the site requires surmounting some challenges. It is in the shoreland district [I’m not sure this is the right term], which restricts the height of the development unless a variance is granted. Th e property is in the ownership of three diff erent property owners. And there could be resistance to development at a scale that makes fi nancial sense for a developer.Proactive work should be pursued to mitigate these concerns, through additional site assembly, and continued steps to build public acceptance of new development at a reasonable scale. Th e development of this site is likely to require public fi nancial support.Development Site 3—Walnut Street between 4th and 5th StreetTh is site is an attractive location for high quality, attractive housing development with underground parking, which fronts on Walnut Street. It would contribute to a high-quality frontage along Walnut Street that makes it feel like a walkable promenade from the river to the freeway. Th e development could be targeted to empty nesters, millennials, downtown workers, and/or seniors.Proactive work can be pursued to increase development interest. Th is could entail negotiating the acquisition of the Walnut Street frontage of the Wells Fargo property, and replatting and rezoning the property so that it supports the intended development. A developer will be looking for a sense of City and public support for development at a reasonable density. Th e development of this site is likely to require public fi nancial support.Retail Vitality StrategiesRetail vitality strategies are presented briefl y in a preceding section, and in more detail in the attached background report. Some key implementation steps are noted here, which could be considered for initial actions.Business and property owner engagement. Successful retail vitality eff orts are almost always spearheaded through an organized stakeholder group of business and property owners. Th is group chooses to work collectively and creatively on a set of priority actions. Fostering this collective will is the most essential element in eff ective action.Public sector support. Investment of time and fi nancial resources on the part of business owners is enhanced by knowing that it is being supported through a commitment of public sector time and resources. Th e establishment of a grant program that matches business investments with public funds is a great way to demonstrate that shared commitment.Other strategies should be prioritized in accordance with the interests and energy of all. DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN Background Report: Market and Development Context April 2017 DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN Background Report: Market and Development Context Tangible Consulting Services | April, 2017 2 Introduction The purpose of this report is to describe the market and development context that shapes the growth and development of Monticello’s downtown district. It provides an overview of the demographic and economic base of Monticello. It looks at market trends and how they could predict future development demands for the downtown district for retail and residential development. It looks at where development opportunities may be located within downtown Monticello. And it documents feedback of the development community about downtown Monticello as a setting for new development. Monticello is a river town, which offers a strategically located crossing of the Mississippi River. The traffic that crosses the river on State Highway 25 both benefits and burdens the City of Monticello. It provides visibility to the historic downtown area. But it bisects the downtown with road widths and traffic volumes that make it difficult to cross. Downtown Monticello’s storefront district on Broadway Street complements the more modern destination retail areas closer to Interstate 94. Monticello is a center of growth, and a local service center, for the surrounding areas. In recent years, Monticello’s growth has largely come in the form of single family homes and apartment development at the edges of the City, and in surrounding areas, as well as retail development oriented to Interstate 94. This is true, even as developable land exists in the heart of the downtown area. DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN Background Report: Market and Development Context Tangible Consulting Services | April, 2017 3 Demographics Monticello has experienced significant growth over the past fifteen years, attracting new households even through the course of the recent economic recession. Source: 2015 ACS 5-Year Estimates Population and Household Characteristics Comparison cities vary widely in the types of households they support. Monticello has a slightly higher number of family households than the average for the state. Of 4,838 total households in Monticello, family households comprise 69% of total households. This compares with 65% in Minnesota. Broken down further, 31% of all households are married couples with children under 18, 20% married couples without children under 18, and 18% other family compositions. Of the nonfamily households, Monticello has a higher rate of individuals living alone as compared with most of its comparison cities. Source: 2015 ACS 5-Year Estimates The average household size in Monticello is a little smaller than most of the comparison cities, but slightly larger than the average for the state. Source: 2015 ACS 5-Year Estimates 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% 140% Population growth (2000-2015) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Household Composition Roommates Living alone Other family Married-couple without children Married-couple with children 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 Average household size DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN Background Report: Market and Development Context Tangible Consulting Services | April, 2017 4 Minority population. Monticello has a larger minority population than the comparison cities. However, the minority populations of all of the comparison cities are significantly lower than the minority share of population in Minnesota as a whole. 9% of Monticello’s residents are latinos, or non-white, compared to 18% in the state of Minnesota. Monticello has a significant Latino population compared to the comparison cities, comprising 6% of Monticello’s total population. Source: 2015 ACS 5-Year Estimates Education Level. The education level of Monticello residents is similar to education levels for Wright County and State of Minnesota. Source: 2015 ACS 5-Year Estimates Financial characteristics and employment. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the median household income in Monticello is $70,254. This is above the state average, whose median household income is $61,492. Source: 2015 ACS 5-Year Estimates 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20% Minority Race/Ethnicity Two or more races Some other race alone Hispanic or Latino Asian alone Black or African American alone 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Educational Attainment Less than high school graduate High school graduate (includes equivalency) Some college, no degree College degree $0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000 $70,000 $80,000 $90,000 $100,000 Median household income DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN Background Report: Market and Development Context Tangible Consulting Services | April, 2017 5 Due to Monticello’s location relative to the larger cities of St. Cloud and the Twin Cities, it is unsurprising that many residents of Monticello work outside the city. Of the 6,459 employed residents of Monticello, 82% work outside of Monticello. Monticello should not be considered a bedroom community though. It offers roughly 5,400 jobs, and provides employment to around 4,300 people who live outside the city. Source: US Census, OnTheMap Housing Characteristics Types of housing. Monticello has a more diverse range of housing options then its comparison cities. Just 54% of Monticello’s housing units are single-family homes. Source: 2015 ACS 5-Year Estimates Tenure (ownership/rental status). In light of Monticello’s larger diversity of housing types, one might expect a residential market dominated by rental housing. But the share of owner occupied housing is 70%, which is right in the middle of the range of comparison cities. This indicates that the great majority of single family homes and town homes are owner occupied. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Housing units by type Mobile home and other Apartment buildings, 10+ units Apartment buildings, 2 - 9 units Townhomes and condominiums Single family homes DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN Background Report: Market and Development Context Tangible Consulting Services | April, 2017 6 Source: 2015 ACS 5-Year Estimates Home value. Homes in Monticello are slightly more modest in value, in comparison to most of the comparison cities, and the statewide average. Source: 2015 ACS 5-Year Estimates 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Housing tenure by unit Renter-occupied housing units: Owner-occupied housing units:$0 $50,000 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 Median Household Value DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN Background Report: Market and Development Context Tangible Consulting Services | April, 2017 7 Development Market Overview Residential Market Context The housing market in Monticello has followed the growth of the population of Monticello. Of particular note for the downtown study area is the multifamily housing market, which will be the focus of this section of the report. Average rents per square foot have seen a steady increase in the last five years. Vacancy rates have also steadily gone down, on average. These indicators reflect a high demand for multifamily housing, and they are consistent with market trends of the state of Minnesota. Average M ultifamily R ent (psf) Source: Costar Vacancy rate, multifamily units Source: Costar The map below shows Monticello’s apartment developments, as catalogued by Costar. The oldest was built in 1964. Many were built in the 1980s. The newest, Monticello Crossings, is the only apartment development built since the Great Recession. Monticello Crossings is a 210 unit apartment building on the east side of Monticello, just south of Interstate 94. It offers market rate apartments that are rented at around $2 per square foot, which is well above the rents that are charged in any apartment buildings in Monticello. And it has rented up at a rate that met the projections of the developer. The success of this development demonstrates that there is a market demand for apartments in Monticello, some of which could be captured in downtown Monticello. Source: Costar Development opportunity analysis. There are a number of areas in downtown Monticello that are good potential locations for new development. DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN Background Report: Market and Development Context Tangible Consulting Services | April, 2017 8 Properties are more likely to be of interest to developers if they are: • Note fully developed currently • Have relatively low value • Are publicly owned The map below is colored according to the value of properties per square foot, as estimated by the City Assessor. Since darker colors indicate higher value properties, lighter colored properties may elicit more interest by developers. Publicly owned properties are outlined in blue. Development Opportunity Analysis Map Source: City of Monticello Property Records Developer input. Five developers and real estate professionals were interviewed as part of this study. They were: • Bill Gorton, Keller William Commercial Midwest • Bill Beard, The Beard Group • Steve Dunbar, Dunbar Development and Ivy Property • Andy Martin, IRET • Matt Goldstein, Schuett Companies These people have deep experience in real estate and development. They know Monticello, or cities like Monticello. And they offered a range of insights and perceptions relative to the prospect of attracting new development to downtown Monticello. The interviewees appreciated that there is a cluster of features in downtown Monticello that would be attractive to new development. • The nearness of the Mississippi River, and adjacent parks • The walkable core of storefront buildings • Monticello’s community center and library • Vacant land (much of it currently as parking lots) But they also noted impediments to development, such as: • The condition of the storefront buildings • The parking lots that dominate the landscape in certain areas • The lack of recent development, which represents an absence of market indicators for how a new development would perform • The need for land assembly in most development opportunity areas Interviewees noted that development is occurring in the downtown areas of cities like Monticello. And the overall sentiment was that downtown Monticello could capture a share of the housing growth that is occurring in the city. However, development in this environment is more complex. Land values are higher. And development faces greater uncertainties than a similar development of an undeveloped area at the edge of town. For that reason, development in downtown Monticello is likely to require an active public private partnership. Development is most likely to occur when: a) a site can be assembled in single ownership, b) A plan for downtown is adopted, and follow-up actions are taken to DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN Background Report: Market and Development Context Tangible Consulting Services | April, 2017 9 demonstrate a commitment to plan objectives c) Actions are taken to improve building conditions and retail vitality on Broadway Street d) City and public support for development at a reasonable density is present. e) There is an understanding that a reasonable level of public financial support will be required, especially for the first development initiatives If these conditions are present, there is likely to be interest on the part of the development community, in doing high quality development in downtown Monticello that meets the goals of the community. DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN Background Report: Market and Development Context Tangible Consulting Services | April, 2017 10 Retail Market Context Much of the newer retail development in Monticello has been highway oriented retail, near Interstate 94. There has been little new retail development in the downtown study area. Retail rents have seen some fluctuations in recent years, but today remain stable. Vacancy rates have seen a very significant decrease, associated with the recovering and growing economy. Average Retail Rents (per square foot ) Source: Costar Retail Vacancy Rate Source: Costar The yellow bars of the Retail Absorption and Deliveries chart indicate a high level of retail absorption over the last five years. In other words, existing retail space has been filling up. That trend, along with additional population growth, may have provided the basis for the development of new retail space in 2013, 2015, and 2016—as represented by the blue bars in of the chart. Retail Absorption and D eliveries Source: Costar Geographic context. Monticello’s retail areas are situated in a regional context, competing against the shopping areas in other nearby cities. One way of understanding that context is looking at the locations of shopping centers in the surrounding area. The following chart shows shopping centers in the area around Monticello, by type of shopping center. The larger types of shopping centers are illustrated with larger circles on the map. DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN Background Report: Market and Development Context Tangible Consulting Services | April, 2017 11 Retail Context Map Source: Costar, Tangible Consulting Services Retail stores in downtown Monticello compete to some degree with the highway oriented retail stores that are near Interstate 94, and with the retail areas in nearby communities. But they also offer something that is distinct from those retail areas—a different retail landscape which sets them apart and makes them unique. Their sidewalk facing storefronts, and density of offerings, makes them pedestrian oriented. The older buildings are part of the historic legacy of Monticello, and make good spaces for retail entrepreneurs and local businesses. Because they are a slightly different animal than the highway oriented retail in Monticello, there is an opportunity to capitalize on this unique character to improve the customer traffic, retail mix, and vibrancy of the area. DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN Background Report: Retail Vitality April 2017 DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN Background Report: Retail Vitality April, 2017 2 Introduction This report considers and assesses the vitality of downtown Monticello’s retail district. This report focuses on the traditional storefront district, the primary walkable retail area downtown. This area is centered on the intersection of Broadway Street and Walnut Street. It encompasses the area in pink in the map at right—specifically, the two blocks of Broadway Street between Pine Street and Locust Street, and the two blocks of Walnut Street between River Street and 3rd Street. Downtown Monticello is a desirable place for people to spend time. It offers a traditional compact storefront district, just a block from the Mississippi River and park, and several blocks from the city’s lively community center and library. Today while some attractive and successful businesses are located in downtown Monticello’s storefront district, it projects the air of a place that once was a spirited center of Monticello but is now tired and unsure of its identity. As people’s preferences for shopping, dining out and recreating are shifting, Monticello has an opportunity to draw on the inherent distinctiveness of its downtown to shape a future that will position it as a local and regional destination. Sources of information. We draw on three sources of information for this report: public input, market context, and our own observations. We reviewed the responses from public input offered on postcards that asked about desirable futures, and from a questionnaire about downtown Monticello’s strengths and weaknesses. We also benefitted from a steering committee survey specifically focused on retail vitality. DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN Background Report: Retail Vitality April, 2017 3 National Retail Trends and Context The retail landscape is changing rapidly. Department stores are closing. Discount retail stores are increasing. As lives get busier, people do more shopping online, and when they actually go out to shop people want an experience – it’s about more than just purchasing a product. But traditional, storefront-style retail areas still have something to offer. The small spaces they offer are ideal for local businesses and start- ups. They offer a place for businesses that can’t afford the rents in newer retail developments, or can’t fill the large spaces in auto-oriented strip areas. Furthermore, people still shop. People want to try things out, or see and hold items, before they purchase them. Physical stores are social places where customers interact with others. People want to go out to businesses where they see people enjoying themselves, and where they can run into friends and neighbors, while drinking, dining, working out, or purchasing daily items close to home. The opportunity for downtown Monticello is to provide people with an experience. A future downtown Monticello may provide a place where many more people are shopping, eating, sitting by the Mississippi River, walking, biking and socializing. In the context of this new national retail reality, downtown Monticello has the bones to be a destination retail area. Downtown Monticello Overview Monticello has a traditional downtown area, with storefronts that face the street. It is walkable, and is just a block or two from the Mississippi River. In the past it was the heart of the City’s commercial activity. As in many small towns throughout Minnesota and the USA, it has been impacted by the development of competing commercial areas. These areas, near Interstate 94 and along Pine Street/Hwy 25, are the result of highway development, population growth in car-oriented neighborhoods, and the changing requirements of national retailers, which are not supported by the small buildings downtown. This has led to less investment in downtown Monticello, and a languishing of some of the properties, as well as a muddled and uncertain identity. This ambiguous identity was reflected in the responses to a survey question about downtown Monticello. When asked to outline downtown on a map, Monticello residents identified a variety of different areas. All included the Broadway and Walnut intersection, but some included:  Just the buildings that front on Broadway Street between Pine and Locust Streets  The four blocks that abut Broadway and Walnut Streets  The four blocks that abut Broadway and Pine Streets  A six-block area between Locust Street and Cedar Street Some included the Mississippi River in downtown, but no one included the library and community Survey Responses Downtown Monticello Assets • Strong local businesses • Some of the traditional unique downtown retail area is intact • Library and community center • Walkability of Broadway and Walnut • Proximity of Mississippi River • Available sites for new housing DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN Background Report: Retail Vitality April, 2017 4 center—despite noting that these destinations are primary reasons for many to go downtown. It’s understandable that downtown Monticello is not easily identified. It is comprised of a number of distinct areas:  The riverfront and River Street which face the Mississippi River  The storefront style retail area centered on Broadway and Walnut Streets  The blocks along Walnut Street that connect the Broadway Street corridor to the heavily used library and community center, and the Cargill plant, which is downtown Monticello’s largest employer  The blocks along Pine Street/Hwy 25—which is fronted with auto-oriented retail stores. This background report is focused on the retail district that is centered on Broadway and Walnut Streets, because that’s the center of Monticello’s pedestrian oriented, storefront- style retail area. Such areas have different requirements and benefit from different policies and activities than more modern, mall-oriented retail. Nearby areas can complement and support Broadway Street’s storefront retail district. Public Input Downtown Monticello Barriers • Not enough retail businesses • Need more restaurants and coffee shops to compliment retail businesses • Not enough housing nearby – more residents means larger customer base • Environment needs to be and feel safer for pedestrians DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN Background Report: Retail Vitality April, 2017 5 Retail Vitality Assessment In assessing conditions in pedestrian oriented retail areas, it’s helpful to look at several aspects of the area. The business mix, and the number (or density) of retail stores, are helpful ways of looking at what the retail district offers, in terms of shopping, dining, or other attractions. Another set of measures is focused on the character of the area, and the degree to which its elements offer an attractive and comfortable environment for people to come to. The following elements are considered below, because they are known to be critical factors in building the character of pedestrian oriented retail areas:  Walkability  Sense of Safety  Visual Identity and Branding  Public Realm Conditions  Business Conditions Business Density and Mix Business density refers to the concentration of businesses in the area. When businesses are concentrated (i.e. there are more businesses per block, for example), it is easier to walk among them and to visit several during one trip. Higher density of businesses also creates a vibrant environment that can feel busy and active with signs, storefront displays, and perhaps outdoor seating. It is an environment that is scaled to people walking by rather than driving by. The two blocks of Broadway Street have a high density of businesses. It is a concentrated retail area. Source: Tangible Consulting Services Business mix refers to the assortment of businesses and business types that make up a retail district. Source: Tangible Consulting Services The mix matters because businesses perform different roles in a district. Some draw nearby residents on a regular basis. Others serve as destinations and attract people from the region as well as the local area. Some businesses generate 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Business Establishments Per 500 feet DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN Background Report: Retail Vitality April, 2017 6 a lot of foot traffic. Others have no walk-up customers at all. Source: Tangible Consulting Services In the chart above, we compare Monticello (both the study area and the two blocks of storefront businesses on Broadway Street) with the storefront-style retail areas in Elk River and Buffalo—as well as in Madison, Wisconsin, where we’ve done a recent retail inventory. The categories are significant. General Merchandise, Apparel, Accessories refers to retail businesses that serve a broader market area: big box discount stores, home and garden, furniture, grocery store, brand clothing store, sporting goods. Neighborhood Goods and Services refers to retailers that offer goods and services that serve a more local market: dry cleaner, pharmacy, convenient grocery store. Food and Beverage refers to restaurants, coffee shops, bars and nightclubs. Non-Retail Destination refers to businesses that do not sell goods but generate walk-in traffic, such as studios, or cultural institutions. Non-Contributing refers to ground floor offices that generate little to no walk-up traffic. Storefront districts can have different flavors. Some offer more restaurants and entertainment than shopping. Shopping areas can serve as destinations, or cater to local needs. They can offer Observations. Monticello has a good mix of businesses both in the broader study area as well as in the two block area of Broadway. And the establishments are highly concentrated. There are fewer general merchandise and apparel establishments than in Elk River and Buffalo, and more establishments providing neighborhood goods and services. Food and beverage businesses make up a large part of successful retail districts today, and Monticello has a much lower percentage of them than the comparison areas. Feedback from the public input made very clear the desire for more food and beverage establishments. On a five point scale, with 1 being “poor” and 5 being “excellent”, survey respondents gave the downtown business mix mostly 2’s and 3’s. Challenges. It is advantageous for a retail district to have some destination retail businesses (General Merchandise, Apparel, Accessories) because 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Business Mix in Storefront Districts Non-Contributing Non-Retail Destinaton Food and Beverage Neighborhood Good's and Services General Merchandise, Apparel, Accessories Public Input Business Mix What do people want downtown? • More restaurants • Local café • Ice cream • Pottery shop • Wine bar • Indoor archery club • Health and wellness shop • Local music at restaurants DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN Background Report: Retail Vitality April, 2017 7 they bring non-local people to the area. In addition, restaurants, coffee shops, ice cream shops are critical elements of a retail district because they offer shoppers a second (or third) place to stop, or as destinations which draw patrons to the area, who secondarily may browse in neighboring shops. Downtown Monticello has few of these types of establishments. Opportunities. The density of businesses on Broadway Street is high, making it a fine-grained storefront district. It is a unique walkable retail area that has the elements from which a strong destination retail area can grow. Improving the business mix by attracting new businesses, particularly more food and beverage establishments or destination retailers, could be an important revitalization strategy. And maintaining the density of buildings along Broadway will be critical to maintaining its identity. Walkability Observations. Broadway and Walnut Streets are highly walkable. On Broadway, the buildings extend to the sidewalk and have few gaps between them, creating a fine-grained retail storefront environment. And many of the buildings have large windows that front the street, which draw one’s eyes into the store and enhance the ease of walking by. Corner properties at Broadway and Walnut draw people around the corner. The properties at Broadway and Pine anchor that intersection less well. Walkability was valued by those who responded to our Retail Vitality Survey. It was identified as an important element of what people want downtown. It was rated fair to good by respondents, being scored 3 or 4 (out of 5) by most survey respondents. One respondent suggested creating a walking tour map for downtown. Challenges. A lot of automobile traffic passes through downtown. At certain times of the day the traffic backs up on Broadway Street. This volume of traffic makes some pedestrians feel unsafe. There are also a few gaps between buildings which detract from the continuity of the is the district. Opportunities. Downtown’s inherent layout is perfect for walking. There are sidewalks, storefronts that line the sidewalks and places to go. There is adequate parking, both on street and off, so that people can park and walk to a destination easily. More visual interest and activation would enrich the environment and make it more comfortable for pedestrians on the street. Activation could mean adding cafes or restaurants with sidewalk seating, or introducing pop-up retail business. It could also mean turning gaps between buildings into places of activity. They could be used as connections to the rear parking areas, or enhanced with seating or a parklet. Attention should also be paid to maintaining the density of storefronts, and avoiding any reduction. Sense of Safety Observations. Perceptions of personal safety seem to be good, but safety from traffic is a significant issue. Survey respondents split their scores on “Sense of Safety” between 2’s and 4’s. They gave scores of 2’s and 3’s to “Traffic Flow and Speed” received 2’s and 3’s. The traffic signals at Broadway and Pine, and the stop signs on Walnut at Broadway, are helpful. But they are not sufficient to address the problems. Challenges. There is a tension between moving along the traffic that builds up on Broadway at certain times of the day and keeping that traffic moving at speeds that create a comfortable pedestrian environment, and ensuring that traffic stops for pedestrians. Turn lanes help move traffic but they can make the street harder to Public Input Walkability and Sense of Safety • Create walking tour map • Add flower boxes to keep bike lanes safe DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN Background Report: Retail Vitality April, 2017 8 cross and the sidewalks feel narrower. In addition, Pine Street, a state highway, carries 35,000 cars per day over the Mississippi River (MNDOT, 2014) and through Monticello’s downtown. Pine Street brings people to downtown, yet it is a challenge to create a transition from downtown’s retail district to the six lane intersection of Broadway and Pine. Opportunities. Downtown’s layout is inherently pedestrian oriented. Sidewalk widths are adequate for making pedestrians feel safe. The brick cross-walks at Broadway and Walnut help notify drivers that there are pedestrians in the area. The median on Broadway could be enhanced at the intersection with Walnut and the sidewalk corners could be bumped out to make crossing safer. Balancing traffic and pedestrian needs is difficult and ongoing, but all measures should aim at shoring up the retail vitality of the downtown area. Visual Identity and Branding Observations. Many successful retail streets have a recognizable visual character that is memorable and vivid. Various patterns in the physical environment can contribute to this character, including:  Building architecture and materials  The historical era of construction  The scale of buildings  The “grain,” or density, of storefronts  Streetscaping elements  Building accessories, such as signage, awnings or exterior lighting Marketing and branding efforts can build on these physical characteristics, building the retail district’s image in the minds of potential customers. Downtown Monticello has building and streetscaping elements that could be leveraged to build the visual branding of the area—most notably the streetscaping that was installed in the early 2000s. But there is little sign of additional coordination related to district identity. In our survey, respondents gave “Downtown’s Brand/Identity” 1’s, 2’s and 3’s. It received no 4’s or 5’s. Challenges. While downtown Monticello has a fine-grained retail character, and is a unique feature in Monticello and the surrounding area, it does not impart the sense of a unified place, as opposed to a collection of individual commercial buildings. Most buildings are from a similar era, but they are quite varied in style and materials. This means other elements must be employed to create that sense of place, to visually pull the area together. Unifying elements could include building elements such as awnings, planters, or exterior lighting. It could also build on some collective themes related to color, texture, or art. Opportunities. Monticello has a starting point on Broadway Street, in the fine grain density of its storefronts. That is the basis for downtown’s brand and the core of what makes it unique and desirable. While buildings may be of different styles and materials, this variety also offers interest and authenticity. There are some gaps in these storefront buildings, and the condition of some of the buildings makes them vulnerable to a renovation or redevelopment that might interrupt this fine grain. It would be important to establish development guidelines for infill buildings, so that the unique character of the district is preserved. Marketing. Marketing activities are extremely important in building the brand identity and customer base of storefront commercial areas. This can encompass a broad range of activities and events. The Monticello Chamber of Public Input Identity and Branding • Improve the lighting • Add flowers • Create a park-like setting DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN Background Report: Retail Vitality April, 2017 9 Commerce plays a lead role in current marketing initiatives, and is well positioned to lead additional efforts and activities. Public Realm Conditions : Observations. It is evident that attention has been paid to the streetscape along Broadway. The trees, pedestrian-scaled ornamental street lights, and sidewalk bump-outs with ornamental fencing—these are features that invite people to walk, linger, and look in store windows. On the flip side, the streetscaping appears a little dated, and would benefit from a fresh round of upgrades. Respondents to the Retail Vitality Survey rated the “Cleanliness” of downtown highly, giving it 3’s and 4’s. Along with “Walkability” and “Parking Availability”, this was the highest rated element. They rated downtown lower for “Attractiveness,” with most scoring it a 2 or a 3. Challenges. Improving the public realm takes resources. And it takes energy to create the common vision for a new look. There are competing priorities for sidewalk area along Broadway Street. At this point in time, sidewalks are sufficiently wide to support pedestrian movement in a vibrant commercial area. But if the road were to be widened to ease traffic congestion, sidewalks would be narrowed, to the detriment of the commercial district. Opportunities. It is clear that the community values the public areas along Broadway. Updating and enhancing its streetscaping would improve the attractiveness of the area. It also demonstrates a public commitment to the area, that could leverage additional private and business investment. There is also an opportunity to claim the areas between buildings for public space, either in connecting the businesses to the parking at rear, or for public elements that invite human activity, such as seating areas and plazas. These spaces could be enhanced with public art, and they could host events or activities. Business and Building Conditions : Observations. Building conditions in downtown retail areas have a significant impact on how the area is perceived. The buildings in downtown Monticello vary greatly in style, size and condition. There are one and two story buildings intermixed. Most have large picture windows on the first floor, though a few do not. Some second story facades have windows facing the street, while others are blank walls. Some appear in good condition. Others do not. Treatments of windows, signage and displays varies greatly as well. Most survey respondents scored “Business Upkeep” a 3 of 5. Challenges. With building styles so varied, the condition of buildings becomes even more important in unifying the district. It is also necessary to attend to deferred maintenance, and renovation where possible in order to preserve the fine-grained pattern of buildings and Public Input Public Realm Conditions • Add benches, trees, more flowers • Create walking routes through the area • Identify connections to the river • Mark historic sites Public Input Building Conditions • Revitalize downtown buildings • Use wood and metal • Keep up buildings DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN Background Report: Retail Vitality April, 2017 10 storefronts. But we know that the collective investment needed in the buildings on Broadway Street may be quite significant. In buildings that are occupied and cash-flowing for the property owner, it can be difficult to justify tackling these improvements on a strictly market basis. Moreover, the expectations established by the previous planning process has led to disinvestment, because it proposed the eventual demolition of the storefront district. It will take some effort to build or restore a collective intent among property and business owners to reinvest in their buildings. And some outside financial incentives will probably also be needed to advance this goal. Opportunities. Downtown Monticello has a variety of businesses, and almost all storefronts are full and activate the street. There are some minor improvements that would go a long way – for example some basic guidelines for what signs should look like. Programs to improve the quality of storefront displays might also be a relatively low-cost way to build the attractiveness of the street and draw people into the businesses. DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN Background Report: Retail Vitality April, 2017 11 Recommendations Downtown Monticello has the potential to be a commercial and activity destination for the City of Monticello and surrounding areas. The small area plan will offer a range of strategies to that end. A focus on retail vitality should be seen as a very important component of the overall revitalization initiative. While some retail vitality activities and programs can be costly, many are not—especially when compared with the cost of attracting large new development, or taking significant action to calm traffic behavior on the major thoroughfares that cross through the City. The following strategies are suggested as priorities for increasing the retail vitality of downtown Monticello, and enhancing its destination quality. Downtown Environment  Make it easier and more inviting to walk to the downtown core by improving connections between the downtown core and the community center and library to the south, and the parks and river to the north, so that visitors to any part of downtown find it easy to get to the Broadway storefront district.  Improve the pedestrian environment by adding stop signs and crosswalks at Broadway and Walnut; making it more comfortable to cross Pine Street at the Broadway intersection; and modernize and beautify streetscape treatments. District Identity  Build Downtown’s brand/identity: identify downtown as the Broadway Walnut area, and name it  Consider the development of some visual themes for the district that will contribute to a sense of identity as buildings are improved and enhanced.  Commit to the fine-grained character of the storefronts along Broadway and around the corner on Walnut. Establish appropriate design guidelines for the area, prevent interruption of this character, fill in gaps, and attend to building disrepair to prevent demolition.  Consider organizational growth to sharpen the focus on the Broadway Walnut area—either within existing organizations, or in a new one. The organizational focus should be on promoting the area as a whole, and identify things all businesses can do together to make the area a destination and generate interest  Activate sidewalks and plaza areas as much as possible, through outdoor seating, engaging public spaces, events, and so forth—so that the vibrancy of the area is visible to passersby. Business Support and Development  Consider the establishment of a program that supports architectural assessment of buildings, and offers financial support for rehabilitation investments that stabilize and enhance existing buildings  Consider the establishment of a façade improvement programs that offers financial support for investments that improve the visual appearance of buildings and district identity  Consider offering support for merchandising, with the goals of improving the attractiveness of window displays and store interiors  Address the quality of the store mix through initiating a retail recruitment program for the district, which would identify and attract key retailers that will be complementary to the existing stores  Increase housing in the downtown area. Growth in the number of people living in and around downtown will support neighborhood- scale retail (retail follows rooftops); and, a range of household types will contribute to greater diversity of retail stores as well as dining establishments Downtown Small Area Study 3-997 Plan • 20io Embracing Downtown Plan 0 Reinvestment • Change in reta i I marketplace 0 Focus on core Figure 20 — Refined Scheme A ML -_ .rLr E1h%q Sumnp awNe�edrx� _ 0laamauve Master Plan The Plan above describes long term buildout of the care blocks of Downtown Monticello_ Engagement Flexible and scalable Small, medium investments by public and private sector which can be implemented overtime Improve Pine Street experience for all • Shift the center of downtown to Walnut and Broadway • Encourage small and medium investment Become a rivertown 1: I I 1 0 111 M7M1RM1 Walk `n' Roll July review Relationship to comp plan • Implementation workshop •Continued Steering Committee involvement Comments Planning Commission Agenda: 06/06/17 1 3C. Community Development Director’s Report. 1.Planning Commission Recommendations Due to the applicant’s schedule, the request of John Chadwick and Jim Bowers for consideration of a request for Comprehensive Plan Amendment for ‘Places to Shop’ to ‘Places to Work’ and a request for Rezoning from a B-4 (Regional Business) District to a I-1 (Light Industrial) District will be heard by the City Council on June 12th, 2017. 2.July Planning Commission Meeting A reminder that the Planning Commission’s regularly scheduled meeting is Tuesday, July 11th due to the 4th of July holiday falling on the normal meeting date, the first Tuesday of the month. 3.Legislative Update Please see attached information from the City Clerk regarding legislative action that will impact ordinance amendment notifications. For subdivision and zoning ordinance amendments, notice is already published and posted for the public hearing component, but the City Clerk will again post to bulletin board and website in accordance with 10-day requirement for the City Council decision. In addition, information on the ordinance amendments proposed will be added to the regular email communications sent by the City. 4.Riverside Church v. City of St. Michael The United States District Court of Minnesota issued a ruling on May 22nd, 2017 on a land use-related case brought by Riverside Church as the Plaintiff against the City of St. Michael as the defendant. For more information on this item, staff would refer the Planning Commissioners to local news outlets on recent stories covering this case. Staff will also provide a verbal overview at the meeting. 5.Volunteer Picnic Please see attached. Staff thanks the Planning Commission for all of its hard work. Hope to see you there! Good afternoon Clerks. One new law impacting cities requires notice of proposed ordinances or amendments to existing ordinances, so I wanted to share it with you sooner rather than later. General overview Chapter 77 creates a new statute in Minn. Stat. ch. 415 that would require certain types of notice for many proposed ordinances or proposed amendment to ordinances. Only interim ordinances have been exempted from this notice requirement. Ten days before a city council’s final vote, a city must: •Provide email notification of proposed ordinances, if the city has an electronic notification system that distributes general city information or notices via email. •Post notice of a proposed ordinance in the same location as other public notices, if a city does not have an electronic notification system. •Update the city website with proposed ordinance language, if the city posts ordinances on its website. If ordinances are not on the city’s website, the city does not have to post proposed ordinances on its website. Non-compliance Note: failure to provide this notice does not invalidate an adopted or amended ordinance. As a BIG THANK YOU... City of Monticello volunteers and their families are invited to join us for a picnic at Ellison Park! Rain or Shine Please RSVP with number attending to HR@ci.monticello.mn.us by June 19th 22 June