Planning Commission Agenda Packet 03-06-1990AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELL0 PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, March 6, 1990 - 7:30 p.m.
Members: Dan McConnon, Mori Malone, Richard Martie, Cindy Lemm,
Richard Carlson
7:30 p.m. 1. Call to order.
7:32 p.m. 2. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting held
January 2, 1990.
7:34 p.m. 3. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting held
February 6, 1990.
7:36 p.m. 4. Public hearing - A variance request to allow no
curbing or hard surfacing in certain areas of a
driving area and loading/unloading area.
Applicant, Martie's Farm Service.
7:91 p.m. 5. Public hearing - Consideration of preliminary plat
application, Plant 20 subdivision. Applicant,
Remmele Engineering, Inc. ,
6:07 p.m. 6. Consideration of adopting a resolution finding the
Remmele TIF plan to be consistent with the
comprehensive plan for the City.
8:22 p.m. 7. Public hearing - A rezoning request to rezone an
R-1 (single family residential) lot to PZM
(performance zone mixed) zone. A conditional use
request to allow a car wash in a PZM (performance
zone mixed) zone. Applicant, West Side Market.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ITEMS
9:02 p.m. 1. Consideration of adopting a resolution of the
Monticello Planning Commission's finding the
Housing and Redevelopment Authority's modified
redevelopment plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1,
modified tax increment financing plans for Tax
Increment Financing District Nos. 1-1 through 1-8,
and tax increment financing plan for Tax Increment
Financing District No. 1-9, all located within the
Redevelopment Project No. 1, to be consistent with
.d, k. Movf
1 Planning Commission Agenda
March 6, 1990
Page 2
the comprehensive plan for the City. Council
Action: Approved as per Planning Commission
recommendation.
9:04 p.m. 2. Set the next tentative date for the Monticello
Planning Commission meeting for Tuesday, April 3,
1990, 7:30 p.m.
9:06 pm. 3. Adjournment.
11
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, February 6, 1990 - 7:30 p.m.
Members Present: Dan McConnon, Mori Malone, and Richard Carlson
Members Absent: Cindy Lenin and Richard Martie
Staff Present: Jeff O'Neill, 011ie Koropchak, and Gary Anderson
1. The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Richard Carlson at
7:37 p.m.
2. Motion was made by Mori Malone, second by Richard Carlson, to approve
the minutes of the regular meeting held January 2, 1990. Motion showed
two in favor, two absent, and one abstention. There being no quorum,
there was no motion to be considered. The motion will be considered at
the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting.
3. Consideration of adootina a resolution of the Monticello Planni
Commission finds thtNo
e Housing and Redevelo t Authority's 2fied
redevelopment plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1modified tax
increment financing plans for Tax Increment Financing District Nos. 1-1
through 1-8, and tax increment financing plan for Tax Increment Financing
District No. 1-9, all located within Redevelopment Project No. 1, to be
consistent with the comprehensive plan Eor the City.
011ie Koropchak, Economic Development Director, was present to explain to
Planning Commission members the proposed industrial developahent project
on Block 2, Lot 4, Oakwood Industrial Park addition. The development on
this lot is proposed to be for Genereux Fico Wood Products and Westlund
Distributing. The proposed uses of the land are consistent with the
other developments within the area, and this is a good use of the land.
Bill and Barb Tapper, owners of Tapper, Inc., were present to show to
Planning Commission members their proposed site plan layout and
additional information about the two prospective businesses which they
are proposing to relocate from the St. Michael area to this proposed
project site.
With no further input from the public and no additional questions from
the Planning Commission members, motion was made by Richard Carlson,
seconded by Mori Malone, to adopt a resolution finding the Mousing and
Redevelopment Authority's modified redovolopment plan for Redevelopment
Project No. 1, modified tax increment financing plans for Tax Increment
Financing District Nos. 1-1 through 1-8, and tax increment financing plan
for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-9, all located within
Redevelopment Project No. 1, to be consistent with the comprehensive plan
for the City. Motion carried unanimously with Cindy Lem and Richard
Martio absent. SEE PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 90-2.
Planning Commission Minutes - 2/6/90
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ITEMS
Mr. Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, explained to Planning
Commission members a number of zoning issues that would be coming before
the Planning Commission in the two upcoming months in regard to two
development projects—The Remmele development and the K -Mart
development. As part of the discussion, Mr. O'Neill explained the
sequence of events which would lead up to the public hearings that will
be caning before the Planning Commission.
Mr. Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, and Cary Anderson, Zoning
Administrator, explained to Commission members the possibility of some
Farmers Home Administration financing of single family home construction
within the Meadow Oak development. Mr. O'Neill and Mr. Anderson
explained the new builder/developer that is intending to build these
hones. Mr. Ken Barthel, Barthel Construction, Rogers, Minnesota, is
proposing to build the minimum sized rambler one-story house, 960 sq ft,
with an attached 320 sq ft garage. In their explanation, Mr. O'Neill and
Mr. Anderson indicated that what the developer/builder is proposing does
meet the minimum requirements of the ordinance and does not require the
additional 320 sq ft to be added on for an attached garage. Meadow Oak
development residents will be meeting with the Farmers Home
Administration in a special informational meeting on Thursday,
February 8, at 7:00 p.m., to have the Farmers Hare Administration explain
their plans for financing of single family homes within the city of
Monticello and also answer any questions that the Meadow Oak development
residents may have. The City Council will consider the Meadow Oak
development residents' request at their next regularly scheduled meeting
on Monday, February 12, 1990, 7:00 p.m.
A conditional use request to allow a a-plex in an R-2 (single and two
family residential) zone. A variance request which would allow two zero
lot line duplexes. A variance request to allow two zero lot line duplex
residential lots to have less than the minimum lot square footage and lot
frontage. Applicant, Lanners Custom Hones. Council action: Denied as
per Planning Commission recommendation.
Consideration to approve a resolution for the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority's modified redevelopment plan to Redevelopment Project No. 1,
modified tax increment financing plans for Tax Increment Financing
District Nos. 1-1 through 1-8, and Tax Increment Financing District
No. 1-9. Council action: Council denied the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority's modified redevelopment plan.
O
I
Q
Planning Commission Minutes - 2/6/90
4. It was the consensus of the three Planning Commission members present to
set the next tentative date for the Monticello Planning Commission
meeting for Tuesday, March 6, 1990, 7:30 p.m.
5. The meeting adjourned at 8:44 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
,Jlctde
Zoning Administrator
-03
Planning Commission Agenda - 3/6/90
4. Public hearinq - A variance request to allow no curbinq or
hard surfacing in certain areas of a driving area and
loadinq/unloadinq area. Applicant, Martie's Farm Service.
(G.A.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Mr. Russ Martie, co-owner of Martie's Farm Service, is
proposing a variance request to allow less than the minimum
requirements on the hard surfacing requirement and the curbing
requirement in certain areas of the driving area and loading/
unloading area. As a minimum requirement of our ordinance,
the ordinance specifically states that all areas used for
parking, loading/unloading, and driving areas be hard surfaced
and that they also have curbing around the perimeter.
The problem that we see with the enclosed site plan which
Mr. Martie has submitted is that he's showing a 12' X 66'
leanto area to the west of the proposed warehouse building.
This is an area which will be used for covered storage of hay,
straw, and fence posts. We would consider these to be
products that customers would be purchasing from Martial Farm
Service, and this area should also receive the hard surfacing
and curbing up to the area of the building. Also on the
easterly portion of the warehouse building, as you will note
on the enclosed building elevation plan, you will see four
overhead garage doors proposed for this area. We are under
the assumption that these overhead doors are proposed to be
used at some point in time. If they are going to be used at
any point in time for a product being brought in or taken out
of this warehouse area, then that area also shall receive hard
surfacing and curbing around its perimeter. Mr. Martie's
intent of being allowed to keep the driveway located near the
southwest portion of this property was to allow him access to
his property utilizing this driveway. The use of this would
be very intermittent, as the primary use would be off of
Dundas Road. Mr. Martie is also showing an area on the east
side of his loading/unloading area that is proposed to be a
gravel surface with no curbing around it. This is an area
that is needed for the semi -truck tractor to use for
maneuvering purposes to get backed up to the loading/unloading
dock area. This area should also receive hard surfacing with
curbing around its perimeter. Due to this being a mayor area
for water runoff, curb cuts should be looked at in the
easterly most portion to let the water go through this area.
Planning Commission Agenda - 3/6/90
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve the variance request to allow no curbing or hard
surfacing in certain areas of a driving area and loading/
unloading area.
2. Deny a variance request to allow no curbing or hard
surfacing in certain areas of a driving area and loading/
unloading area.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
City staff recommends denial of the variance request to allow
no curbing or hard surfacing in certain areae of a driving
area and loading/unloading area. The applicant has failed to
define the hardship that would be created by allowing no hard
surfacing and curbing in certain areas of the site plan. If
Mr. Martie fully intends to utilize the driveway near the
southwest corner of his property, then the driveway entrance
should have a gate to limit the ingress/egress out of this
driveway, and the Planning Commission may look at approving a
variance not to install curbing and hard surfacing in the
areas south of the designated area in front of the east
overhead doors of the warehouse and also in the area south of
the west leanto area.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the location of the proposed variance request; Copy of
the site plan for the proposed variance request; Copy of the
ordinance section curbing and hard surfacing requirements.
`i
L
ib
Avb _Laquip�t.,,t
a
r a
a
vi
ro 4
-dri d\
_
KARTI
'000
0
376'
.� t J
k 1
6S
E a a
.�• 1 .
/
. • R
} 37V'
lu WRSGM7 COUAITS 1116900 N0. 117
�l
.V3'
(m) LIGHTING: Any lighting ucod toilluminato
on off-atroot Parking aroo shall bo
00 orran(jaway
as to g props the light
away frog adjoining property, abutting
rooidontial uaao and public right-of-ways
and bo In complianco with Choptor
rtn •Lcn � Irl ..n r..i _ - mer
TO INTERLOCX INTERLOCK
K; -,LZ MINIMUM MINIAU:t MSNIItUM
30 48.6- 44.5- 40.3-
45 56.8' 53.4- 50.0'
60 62.01 59.7- 57.4-
90 64.0- 64.0- 64.01
Parallel Parking Twenty-two
: (22) feet in length.
- (f)
No curb cut access shall exceed twenty-four (24)
feet in width.
(g)
Curb cut openings and driveways shall
be at a minimum three (3) feat from
the side yard property line in residential
districts and five (5) feet from the
side yard lot line in business or
industrial districts.
(h)
Driveway access cub openings on a
public street except for single, two
family and townhouse dwellings shall
not be located leen than forty (40)
feet from one another.
(i)
The grade elevation of any parking
area shall not exceed five (5) percent.
(j)
Each property shall be allowed one (1) curb cut per
one hundred twenty-five (125) foot
of street frontage. All property
shall be entitled to at least one (1)
i�
curb cut. Single family uses shall be limitad
to one (1) curb cut acc000 par proporty.
(k)SURFACING:
All aroaa intended to
ba utilized for parking apace and
drivowayo shall be surfaced with meterialo l
suitable to control dust and drainage.
Excopt in the coca of single family
and two family dwollingo, driveways
and stalls shall bo surfaced with
aix (6) inch class fivo baso and two (2)
Inch bituminous toppinq or concrete
equivalent. /Plans for surfacing and
'drainage of drivoways and atolls for
fivo (5) or more vehicles shall bo
submittod to the City Enginoor for
his roview and the final drainago
plan shall bo subject to his written
j approval
(1)
STRIPING: Excopt for single, two
f,
family and townhoucoo, all parking
stollo shall bo markod with whits
paintod linos not Icon than four (4)
Inchon wido.
(m) LIGHTING: Any lighting ucod toilluminato
on off-atroot Parking aroo shall bo
00 orran(jaway
as to g props the light
away frog adjoining property, abutting
rooidontial uaao and public right-of-ways
and bo In complianco with Choptor
rtn •Lcn � Irl ..n r..i _ - mer
(q) ALL DRIVEWAY ACCESS OPENINGS shall
require culvert unless the lot is
served by storm sever or is determined
unnecessary by Building Inspector.
Size of culvert shall be determined
by Building Inspector but shall be
a minimum of twelve (12) inches in
diameter.
(r) CURBING: _
!. All commercial and industrial
off-street parking areas and
driveways in com=ercial areas
1 ahall have a six (6) inch nonsurmourtable
continuous concrete curb around
the perimeter of the parking
--
11. All off-street parking in the
I-1 and I-2 districts shall
hove an ins:lrmounta� b1e curb
barrier which, 1! not constructed
of six (6) inch continuous corcrote
curbing. Ball require prior
approval from the Planning Cocissicn
and City Council -P-6rivevuys
in the I-1 and I-2 districts l•J - ^�
ehali have a six (6) inch incur=ountable
continuous concrete curb along
its perimeter. I— - _— -•__ •-
iii. All curb disigno and materials
eholl be approved by tho City
Engineer.
(E] MAINTENANCE. It shell be the joint and several
responsibility of the loseoo and owner of the
principal use, uses, or building to maintain
in anoat and adequate manner, the parking space,
acceoowaya striping, landscaping, and required
fences.
(FJ LOCATION: All accoesory off-street parking
facilities requlrod by this ordinance shall
be located and restricted so follows:
1. Required accessory off-street parking shall
be on the same lot under the same ownership
no the principal uoo being served, except
under the provloions of Chaptor ], Section 5 (I].
2. Except for singlo, two family and townhouse
dwollingo, hood -in parking. directly off
of and adjacent to a public otroot, with
each stall having its own direct access
to the public street, shall bo prohibited.
Planning Commission Agenda - 3/6/90
I
y
5. Public hearing - Consideration of preliminary plat application,
Plant 20 subdivision. Applicant, Remmele Enqineerinq. (J.O.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Remmele Engineering proposes a replatting of Lot 6, Block 1, in
Oakwood Industrial Park, along with a portion of the Boyle
property, Section 28, in a manner that will create a lot suitable
for the Remmele industrial development. The plat calls for
vacation of the Fallon right-of-way north of Chelsea Road along
with a re -orientation of that right-of-way along the eastern
boundary of the developed property. It was necessary to realign
the Fallon right-of-way so as to provide the potential for a
freeway overpass at this point as required by the comprehensive
plan.
The preliminary plat appears to be consistent with requirements of
the Monticello Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to recommend approval of the preliminary plat.
Staff has reviewed this plat in some detail; however, we have
not gotten together to review it in its entirety. It is our
view that from what we see it appears to be consistent with
the ordinances; and at this point, we recommend approval.
However, at the Planning Commission meeting, we may suggest
some changes to the preliminary plat prior to Council review
on March 12.
At this time, there are some complications regarding Remmele
acquisition of the Jim Boyle property as well as City
acquisition of the land necessary for the right-of-way south
of Chelsea. Due to these complications, there may be some
delay in the ability of the City to record the plat, as full
ownership of the property affected by the plat must be
demonstrated prior to the recording of the plat. It is our
hope to get these problems squared away as soon as possible.
2. Motion to recommend denial of the preliminary plat.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff rocommends alternative #1.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the Remmele plant 20 preliminary plat.
i
a
3
�Nor:n hnr or NE va \CEPTION�, J T 'y ! /Coinri d Semon, u•i7•li•la, 71?/, R2D
/ of Soc 14, //21, R77 i $99,10'qvva �` •.•�
ou �
I/
.99 If
c,
/
tl.o• � � 0'R.••
'til r..
ci
k
L?6oucpr c•S .1mlr rosrmm-.,Z
L
n,s 1ass
i
e•rvp5;�o,,, � J �!
t��;1'
`I �4p 4•
C,1
If
41
Ze
�\
v
V
v o
�' to • "'�^
:.�.
L . _____.
___._ _� ,�_
;•a 'w 1,
,I
ri V4
—
�
S
a
IMOW ALL PERSONS By THESE PRES-139 That Remoole Engineering, Inc., • Mlnneaota Corporation,
owner and proprietor of the following described property situated in the County of Wright, State
of Mlnnosate, to -clef
tot 6, Block 1, Oakwood Industrial Park. According to the plat thereof of record in said Wright
County, attempting therofros that part of said Int 6 lying northerly of the north lino of the
Northeast Quarter of Secti0C la, Township 121, Range 25: also excepting theratrom that Wirt
of as Id tat 6 lying northeasterly of the nouthwamtorly right -of -Way line of Interstate
Nigtnay gen
together with that part of vacated Fallon Avenue, also known as Industrial Drive, nbuttlwl maid
Lot 6 and being none particularly d000ribod u followat Beginning at the lntornection of the
Cant IOro of section le. Township 111, Range 25, with the oouthvootnrly right—f-way lime At
Interntato Highway get thence along Bald oast lino South I degree 14 ■inotes 38 oocondo wean,
annuned baof0 of bearings, a distance of 547.47 teat, theme North 61 degrees le m:nut.n 4S
.00Onda We at 36.46 COOL to the east Lina of said tat 61 thellea along said Oe6L Ilea of tai 5
North 1 dogre. 14 minutoo 38 aocondo East 545.76 feet to said nouttweoterly right-ot-way Ilan
of Intersteto Highway 941 thence along said right -of -ray lira end along a nontangontial curve,
concave eouthvoo[vrly and hewing a rndluo of 5545.58 feet, a central angle of 0 degree. 22
dimes 10 oeeends and a chord bearing of South 66 degrees OI Minutes 43 eeeonda root, on etc
J iotaneo of 35.77 fast to the point of lwginnlng.
together with that part of the Northuoat Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of roetion If,
Township 121,Range 25, mora particularly described an follows: ReglMlnq at the inte-Cetion
of the west lino of .aid Section 13 with the mouthwaoterly riqht-cfway line of Interatnte
ltlghvay 941 thence along said went line South 1 degroo 14 mintoo 18 Cocoon. went• Aonur 1
Malo of bear inge, o diot.nce of 547.47 matt thence South 61 chores 14 mi no to. 46 "C110-1I:nnt Ia0.00 (Cott thence North 26 dngrooa 25 slmtten 15 aeconds East 496.a, lent to said
eouthwenterly right-ef-way lino of Interstate Highway 9U thence along said right-of-way lire
and ala" A hootor anti nl CIIrve, —'.v
oeuthwcat.rly and having a radius of 5545.55 trot.
n —ntra1 angle of 4 degrees 16 mint.. 01 smcotdo and A .'hard bearing of North 61 deg,Mo 44
ml muton 19 oreonda Went, nn are distance of 411.00 lent to the point 01 brtlinni An, imfuatna
nil that part of rail— Avemlo or Induatrial Drive, vacatod, which in contained within the
foregoing described parcel:
and that City of Monticello, A MI-notamtnicipni corporation, owner and proprietor of the
I of helm dancrl had property slls.tnd in the County of Wright, State of Mlnnaoota, to-ruu
All that part of the Ilorthweat Quarter of the Northwest thertor of Section 13, Twnnhlp 121,
Nor"] 25, more part loulnrly described as fol lows: Comsonclt" At
the intersection of the cmt
lin of said Section 11 with the nouthwont.11Y right -of -ray line of Interstate highway 441
thoo Chong mid vest lino South 1 dogma 14 minute. 30 eoconde West, annueod be so of
bon Mrs ago, n di manse nt 547.47 teat to the point of bell Ming$ thence South 61 dogrcea la
nimttoo 45 oocando Coot 100.00 fmtl thane South 26 drgram 25 minutes 15 oecondo West mo')
lent to a point of ourvnturol Chance alonq a Curve• cones- easterly and having a rad lu, wi
r. .13
foot and n control angle of 25 dtgrhoa 10 mimeo 37 .—Mo, an are tiot.nca of 31n..,,,
loot to • point ofren-tanq neyl thoncn North 98 degrees 45 el nuts 11 seconds Naot 17. on trot
to on Is vent lino of 11—tion lit thnarn along aid wast )I—, North I degrrv, 14 of ... t,•�, e1
,..•,:ands Cast SIh.5/ teat to the point of beginning$
I h., v. rehouse I" elnaD to be survayed end platted es PUINT 20 and do botchy donate and d1llcate to
thepublic for public uno forever the thoroughfares as shown on thin plat, and do nine dont. a.3
dad l eat. the natoaonto an shown an thin plat for drainmgo and utll ity purpmau only.
In wltwaewhermf enid Nesaolo Engineering. Inc., ban cauard these proponto to he olgnaJ by Ito
proper officer and Ito corporate coal to be harounto affixed thio _day of__ __ ,,19, ,.
R13Ctrix EUGUICCRIRO. INC.
its Vic. Prmldent.
M�Ml.hael J: Pudil�---�
Inwitness whereof Said City of Monticello has Caused thou. prosonto to be signed ly Ito prnper
.1 l 1.... this day of. 19_
CITY OF MOWTICELW
fly �.Nayor 0y _ City 10.inir.tt ,ten
Icnnuth Maus Ni Chard Wolfctoll.r
STATE Or Mmman
COUNTY OF
Me foregoing inotruRent was acknowlndgod before wo thin , _ day of
, l9_
by elands! J. Pudll, VICA President of Presidia Lng nearing, ICO.,• Nlnn•nofi tnrparet ion, on
behalf of ted Corporation.
Notary {volISTATE_ Casty Nlnn000ta
0► MINNESOTA Ry CuelsaM lon�Lxplr4u
COUNTY 0►
Thr torpoing Instrument was acknowledged before me this day of,
by M
ennoth Rau*, Mayor, std PiChard 10011810119r, Cl ty Adalnistrator of the City of N.mticollu,
a Mlnna*ots Municipal corporation, On behalf of said mantelpal corporation.
Gotary Wubi-lo" '—" county: min—,";
Planning Commission Agenda - 3/6/90
6. Consideration of adopting a resolution finding the Remmele TIF
elan to be consistent with the comprehensive plan for the
City. (O.K.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
This agenda item is for the Planning Commission to review and
adopt a resolution stating the tax increment finance plan
relating to Tax Increment District No. 1-10 (Remmele
Engineering, Inc.) is consistent with the Monticello
Comprehensive Plan (consistent to the land use plan).
Remmele Engineering, Inc., is a supplier of high quality,
technologically advanced services in the areas of:
1) contract fabricating, machining, and assembly; 2) designing
and building custom equipment for automating or mechanizing a
variety of manufacturing processes; and 3) fabricating and
building machinery designed by customers where it fits their
manufacturing capabilities. Customers for all Remmele
Engineering services consist primarily of manufacturing
industries.
Remmele Engineering currently has 400 employees located in
four plants. Two plants are located in Big Lake and two
plants are located in St. Paul. Based upon the long term
needs of the company, the site must be able to accommodate
future expansion of a facility up to 60,000 sq ft. The
Initial plant will be 23,333 sq ft with two planned
expansions. Initial employment will be 50 skilled labor jobs.
Site location is Lot 6, Block 1, Oakwood Industrial Park,
6.58 acres; vacated Fallon Avenue, .82 acres; Boyle property,
2.1 acres for a total of 9.4 acres. Additionally, Remmele
Engineering will purchase an approximate .92 acres and deed to
the City for realignment of Fallon Avenue. Plans call for the
City to acquire a small triangular piece of Boyle property
South of Chelsea Road to complete the realignment of Fallon
Avenue.
Prior action by the Planning Commission was to hold a public
hearing for a preliminary plat subdivision request to replat
two existing industrial platted lots into platted lots and
outlots. Assumption is the request will be granted by the
Planning Commission. On March 7, the HRA will hold a public
hearing on the disposition of lands. The TIF Plan was adopted
by the HRA on February 7.
4
Planning Commission Agenda - 3/6/90
On March 12, 1990, the City Council will hold a public hearing
for utility and drainage easements to be vacated (Lot 6,
Block 1) and for street (Fallon Avenue) to be vacated. Also,
the Council will hold a public hearing for the TIF plan and
adoption of the plan as related to TIF District No. 1-10.
The TIF plan relating to TIF District No. 1-10 is available in
complete form for review at the City Hall. A portion of the
plan is included as your supporting data. The total Phase I
TIF budget is $260,000 (land acquisition $120,000, and on-site
utilities/grading/landscaping $65,000 from the HRA excess
fund). Remaining costs are soft costs, capitalized interest,
etc.
Representative (s) from Remmele Engineering will be present at
the March 6 Planning Commission meeting.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Adopt the resolution finding the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority's modified redevelopment plan for
Redevelopment Project No. 1, modified tax increment
financing plans for Tax Increment Financing District
Nos. 1-1 through 1-9, and tax increment financing plan
for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-10, all
located within the Redevelopment Project No. 1, to be
consistent with the comprehensive plan for the City.
2. Do not adopt the resolution.
3. Table the adoption of the resolution.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Recommendation is for the Planning Commission to adopt the
resolution as you determine the tax increment finance plan
relating to TIF District No. 1-10 to be consistent with the
Monticello Comprehensive Plan. Site location is zoned I-1
(light industrial). The HRA has adopted the plan, as the
project is consistent with HRA policies.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the resolution for adoption= Map of the site location;
Copy of a portion of the TIF plan.
5
RESOLUTION OF THE MONTICELLO PLANNING
ca,,y
COMMISSION FINDING THE HOUSING AND
REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY'S MODIFIED
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT NO. 1, MODIFIED TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING PLANS FOR TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING DISTRICT NOS. 1-1 THROUGH
1-9, AND TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-10,
ALL LOCATED WITHIN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
NO. 1, TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE CITY.
WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority's Modified
Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1, Modified Tax
Increment Financing Plane for Tax Increment Financing District
NOS. 1-1 through 1-9, and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for
Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-10 (the 'Plana•), all
located within Redevelopment Project No. 1, have been submitted
to the Monticello Planning Commission, Pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes, Section 469.0271 and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said Plane to
determine the consistency of said Plane to the Comprehensive
Plan of the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE MONTICELLO PLANNING
COMMISSION, that the Plans are consistent with the Monticello
Comprehensive Plan, and the Commission recommends approval of the
Plans to the Monticello City Council.
Adopteds March 6, 1990
Chairman
Attests
V
BOUNDARY MAP OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-10
AS ESTABLISHED MARCH 12, 1990
fi�.
•• AYI M••
�. leti r
1!
at
t
asft wi 're-"
Q
EXHIBIT XI -A
L Tax ncrement--ainancino-District-no. s-10 _
(As adopted March 12, 1990)
�BUD(iBR
PHASE I
PHASE II
Land Acquisition $120,000
0
On -Site Utilities/Grading/ 65,000
0
Landscaping
Public Improvements 0
$ 55,000
Soils Corrections 0
0
Subtotal $185,000
5, 0
Contingency 0
0
Administration 15,000
10,000
Professional Services 10,000
5 000
Subtotal $210,000
70"000
Capitalized Interest 47,000
14,000
Discount 3,000
1 000
$260,000
850000
It is anticipated that Phase I will proceed at the commencement
of the project and Phase II will proceed as additional
increment
becomes available through future development.
(As adopted November, 1982)
Subsection 1.11. Land Use. A11 new and/or existing
development on land identl?TW-on Exhibits I -C through
I -P
as "property to be acquired" or 'possible acquisition*
will be
subject to the following uses and requirements
1. Uses Permitted in Designated Areas.
`1
a. industrial --All permitted, accessory and conditional uses
as specified in Chapters 15 and 16, Monticello zoning
Ordinance, relating to I-1 (Light Industry) and I-2
(Heavy Industry) tones. Planned Unit Developments, where
applicable, will be considered.
b. HouainaResidentiel--All permitted, accessory and con-
ditions uses as specified in Chapters 8 and 10.
Monticello zoning Ordinace, relating to R-3 (Medium
Density Residential) and R -B (Residential -Business)
zones. Planned Unit Developments, where feasible, will
be encouraged.
c. Downtown/Commercial--All permitted, accessory, and con-
ditional uses in accordance with the provisions governing
all •B• zones and including R -B, providing however that
any commercial development in an R-0 zone shell be
coordinated with the goals and objectives of the Housing
Plan. Planned Unit Developments, especially in the B-3
zone (Highway Business), vill be encouraged.
1
SECTION XI
TALC INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-10
Subsection 11.1. Statement of Obiectives. See Subsection
1.4 of the Redevelopment Plan.
Subsection 11.2. The Redevelopment Plan. See Section I,
Subsections 1.1 through 1.20.
Subsection 11.3. Description of the Project. The project,
located within Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-10,
consists of the construction of a 24,000 square foot office/
production facility. This facility is to be constructed in
the summer of 1990, and completed by December 31, 1990. It is
anticipated that 40 additional full-time positions will be
created as a result of this construction.
Subsection 11.4. Parcels to be Included in Tax Increment
Financina District No. 1-10. The following property is located in
the City of Monticello, County of Wright, State of Minnesota.
Leaal Description
(As adopted March 12, 1990)
Lot 6, Block 1, Oakwood Industrial Park according to the recorded
plat thereof; Wright County, Minnesota.
The East 33.00 feet of said Oakwood Industrial Park lying north of
the easterly extension of the north line of Chelsea Road of said
Oakwood Industrial Park, said East 33.000 feet shown as Township
Road.
That part of the Northwest Quarter of Section 13, Township 121,
Range 25, Wright County, Minnesota, lying south of the southerly
right-of-way line of Interstate Highway 1-94, north of Chelsea
Road and lying northwest of a line distant 60.00 feet northwest of
and parallel with a line described as followst Beginning at a
point on the southerly right-of-way line of Interstate Highway
I-94 distant 410.00 feet southeast from the west line of said
Northwest Quarter as measured along said southerly right-of-way
linel thence southwesterly to a point on the north line of
Chelsea Road distant 180.00 feet southeast from said west line of
the Northwest Quarter as measured along said north line of
Chelsea Road and said line there terminating.
Subsection U.S. Parcels in Acquisition. The Authority
intends to acquire the property listed in Subsection 11.4, which
property is located within Tax Increment Financing District No.
1-10.
XI -1 W �f _
Properties identified for acquisition will be acquired either
by the City or the Authority in order to accomplish public
improvements listed in Subsection 1.9 of the Redevelopment Plan
hereof.
Subsection 11.6. Development Activity in Tax Increment
Financing District No. 1-10 for Which Contracts will be Signed.
The following contract(s) will be entered into by the Housing
and Redevelopment Authority and the person(s) named below:
Prior to the certification of Tax Increment Financing
District No. 1-10, a Development and Assessment Agreement will be
executed between the Rousing and Redevelopment Authority of
Monticello and Remmele Engineering, Inc.
Subsection 11.7. Other Specific Development Expected to
Occur within Redevelopment Proiect No. 1.
(As specific development is expected to occur, it will be
inserted into this Subsection.)
Subsection 11.9. Estimated Public Improvement Costs and
Supportive Data. See Subsection 1.10 of the Redevelopment Plan
for estimated costs associated with Redevelopment Project No. 1.
Subsection 11.9. Sources of Revenue. Public improvement
costs, and other costa outlined in Subsection 1.10 of the
Redevelopment Plan will be financed through the annual collection
of tax increments.
Subsection 11.10. Original Tax Capacitv. Pursuant to
Section 469.177, Subd. 1, of the Tax Increment Financing Act, the
original tax capacity value for Tax Increment Financing District
No. 1-10 is estimated to be $2,790, based on the tax capacity
value of all taxable real property within Tax Increment Financing
District No. 1-10. Pursuant to Section 469.177, Subds. 1 and 4,
of the Tax Increment Financing Act, the County Auditor of Wright
County (the "County Auditor•) shall certify in each year the
amount by which the original tax capacity value has increased or
decreased as a result in a change in tax-exempt property within
Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-10, reduction or enlarge-
ment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-10 or changes
in connection with previously issued building permits. In any
year in which the current tax capacity value of Tax Increment
Financing District No. 1-10 declines below the original tax
capacity value, no tax capacity value will be captured and no tax
increment will be payable to the Authority.
XI -7 9' n
V
Subsection 11.11. Estimated Caotured Tax Caoacity Value.
Pursuant to Section 469.175, Subd. 1, and Section 469.177, Subd.
2, of the Tax Increment Financing Act, the estimated captured tax
capacity value in Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-10 at
final completion will approximate $41,710. This estimated annual
captured capacity value is determined in the following manners
Estimated Tax Capacity Value at Final Completion $44,000
Original Tax Capacity 2,290
Captured Tax Capacity Value $41,710'
'Please refer to Exhibit X -B for the year-to-year expected tax
increment for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-10.
Subsection 11.12. Type of Tax Increment Financing District.
Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-10, is pursuant to Section
469.174, Subd. 10(x)(2) a Redevelopment District as described
below:
•8701 of the parcels in the area of Tax Increment Pinancing
District No. 1-10 are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities,
or other improvements and 201 of the buildings or improvements
are structurally substandard and an additional 301 of the
buildings or improvements are found to require substantial
renovation or clearance in order to remove such existing
conditions as: inadequate street layout, incompatible uses or
land use relationships, overcrowding of buildings on the land,
excessive dwelling unit density, obsolete buildings but suitable
for improvement or conversion, or other identified hazards to the
health, safety and general well-being of the community'"
Subsection 11.13. Duration of Tax Increment Pinancinq
District No. 1-10. Pursuant to Section 469.176, Subd. 1, of the
Tax Increment Financing Act, the duration of Tax Increment
Financing District No. 1-10 will be twenty-five 125) years from
the approval of the Tax Increment Financing Plan. The first tax
increment is expected to be received in 1992.
Subsection 11.14. groposed Develooment Analysis. Pursuant
to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subd. 1(7), specific
findings and analysis relating to the proposed development in Tax
Increment Financing District No. 1-10. Additional relevant
documentation relating to the findings and analysis will be on
file and available for review in the city Administrator's office.
XI -3 R
Subsection 11.15. Estimated Impact on Other Taxinq
Jurisdictions.
Test No. 1
The estimated impact on other taxing jurisdictions assumes
construction would have occurred without the creation of
Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-10. If the construction
is a result of Tax Increment Financing, the impact is $0 to other
entities.
Test No. 2
Notwithstanding the fact that the fiscal impact on the other
taxing jurisdictions is $0 due to the fact that the financing
would not have occurred without the assistance of the City, the
following estimated impact of Tax Inrement Financing District No.
1-10 would be as follows if Test No 1 (the 'but for` test) was
not mets
IMPACT ON TAX BASE
ORIGINAL F(RVRE CAPTURED
NET TAX NET TAX NET TAX
CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY DISTRICT
PAYABLE PAYABLE PAYABLE i OF
j ENTITY TAX BASE 1990 1990 1990 ENTITY
Wright OD. $42,798,916 $2,290 $44,000 $41,710 .0979
City of Monticello 15,874,595 $2,290 $44,000 $41,710 .2639
I.s.D. ND. 882 18,312,425 $2,290 $44,000 $41,710 .2288
Hospital District 22,886,660 $2,290 $44,000 $41,710 .182 i
IMPACT ON TAX CAPACITY MILL RATES
NET TAX CAPACITY POTENTIAL
ENTITY RATE 1990 TAXES
Wright Co. 21.314 8 8,890
City of Monticello 16.187 6,752
I.S.D. No. 682 40.861 17,043
Hospital District 2s8.1133 .�.1,.c,177,3�
gI.1751 033:059
*Please refer to Exhibit XI -B for the year-to-year expected tax
increment for Tax Increment Pinancing District No. 1-10.
XI -4
GO)
A. Future Tax Capacitv. The estimated future tax capacity of
Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-10 at final
completion as determined by the City Assessor is $44,000
payable 1992. Please refer to Exhibit XI -B for the
year-to-year expected tax increment from Tax Increment
Financing District No. 1-10.
B. Proiected Timing. The payment of the first full tax
increment from Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-10 will
be received by the Authority in 1992.
C. Original Tax Capacitv. The County Assessor's records show
the original tax capacity of Tax Increment Financing District
No. 1-10 to be $2,290 for taxes in 1989 and payable in
1990.
D. Gross Tax Capacitv Rate. The gross tax capacity rate is
81.175 percent.
E. Tax Increment. Total tax increment at the completion of all
redevelopment activity has been calculated assuming a static
gross tax capacity rate and a valuation increased by zero
percent (0%) compounded annually.
P. Capital Ezeenditures. Capital expenditures are a aummary
of the items associated with the public improvement costs set
forth in Subsection 10.8 and are to be financed from the pro-
ceeds of the Bonds and tax increment revenue.
Subsection 11.17. Estimated Amount of Bonded Indebtedness.
It is anticipated that $260,000 of bonded indebtedness will be
Incurred with respect to this portion of the Redevelopment
Project and an additional $85,000 will be incurred when
additional increment is available.
Subsection 11.18. Tax increment Pinancina Account for Tax
Increment Pinancina District No. 1-10. The tax increment received
With respect to Tax increment Financing District No. 1-10 will be
submitted by the Authority to the City and segregated by the
Authority in a special account or accounts (the "Tax Increment
Ar'count•) on its official books and records or as otherwise
established by resolution of the City to be held by a trustee or
trustees for the benefit of holders of the Bonds.
Subsection 11.19. Modification of Taxnerement Pinancinq
eistrict No, 1-10. An of March 12, 1990, Jere have been no
modifications made to Tax Increment Pinancing District No. 1-10.
XI -5 C(P)
EXPECTED YEAR- 0-YEM TAX INCREMENTS RELATED TO TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-10 AND TAX CAPACITY ANALYSIS
YEAR BASE TC AOJ FACTOR AOJ BASE FUT TC NET CAP TC 1990 TCR ANNUAL TI
$812,694
8]IRIBIT XI -B �I w
W
$44,000
89/90 $2,290
1.00
0.81175
90/91
$2,290
$41,710
91/92
$2,290
$41,710
$33,868
92/93
$2,290
$41,710
$33,868
93/94
$2,290
$41,710
$33,858
94/95
$2,290
$41,710
$33,858
95/96
$2,290
$41,710
$33,868
98/97
$2,290
$41,710
$33,858
97/98
$2,290
$41,710
$33,858
98/99
$2,290
$41,710
$33,858
99/2000
$2,290
$41,710
$33,858
2000/2001
$2,290
$41,710
$33,858
2001/2002
$2,290
$41,710
$33,858
2002/2003
$2,290
$41,710
$33,858
2003/2004
$2,290
$41,710
$33,868
2004/2005
$2,290
$41,710
$33,868
C005/2008
006/2007
$2,290
$41,710
$33,858
_
$2,290
$41,710
$33,858
2007/2008
$2,290
$41,710
$33,858
2008/2009
$2,290
$41,710
$33,858
2009/2010
$2,290
$41,710
$33,858
2010/2011
$2,290
$41,710
$33,858
2001/2012
$2,290
$41,710
$33,858
2012/2013
$2,290
$41,710
$33,858
2013/2014
$2,290
$41,710
$33,868
2014/2015
$2,290
$41,710
$33,868
$812,694
8]IRIBIT XI -B �I w
W
n
Q
DISTRICT CERTIFICATION PORN
Date Prepared: March 12, 1990
Name of District or Modification: Tax Increment Financina
District No. 1-10
Date of City Council Approval: March 12. 1990
REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT CERTIFICATION
At the time of district creation or modification, the followina
conditions apply:
The City Council resolution contained the finding that the
area was blighted.
Other significant findings were contained in the resolution:
70% of the parcels in the project were improved and more
than 50% of the buildings were structurally substandard to
a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance.
70% of the parcels in the project were improved and 20% of
the buildings and improvements were structurally
substandard and an additional 30% of the buildings and
improvements required substantial renovation or clearance
to remove blighting conditions.
The property consisted of vacannt, unused, underused,
inappropriately used or infrequently used railyards, rail
storage facilities or excessive or vacated railroad
rights-of-way.
Supportinq documentation on file:
X City Council Resolution
X Land Use Plan Map
Soils Correction Data
Photographs
Other:
This Form Prepared by:
Business Development Services. Inc.
Title
X Project Plan Oblectives
Building Condition Data
X Field Notes
Original Building Condition Data Collected by:
N/A
Title
Documentation in support of District Certification is on file at
the City offices.
EXHIBIT XI -C
W
Date
APPENDIX B
CHRONOLOGY OF RESOLUTIONS
ESTABLISHING THE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM,
THE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT,
THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLANS, AND THE TAX
INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTS
Action
(Development District No. 1/Tax Increment Pinancing District
No. 1-10).
February
9, 1990
Letters sent to Wright
County, Public School
District No. 882, and
Hospital District.
February
20, 1990
Notice of HRA Public
Hearing sent to local
newspaper.
February
22, 1990
Notice of HRA Public
Hearing is published in
the local newspaper, calling
for a Public Hearing on
March 7, 1990.
Pebruary
26, 1990
Resolution of the City
Council calling for a
Public Hearing.
Pebruery
27, 1990
Notice of Public Hearing
sent to local newspaper.
March 1,
1990
Notice of Public Hearing is
published in the local
paper, calling for a public
hearing on March 12, 1990.
March 1,
1990
Notice of HRA Public Hearing
is published in the local
newspaper, calling for a
Public Hearing on
March 7, 1990.
-1-
V
7
Data
Action
March
6. 1990
Resolution of the Planning
Commission finding the
plans to be in conformance
_
with the Comprehensive Plan
of the City.
March
7, 1990
HRA Public Hearing.
March
12, 1990
Public hearing was held.
March
12. 1990
Resolution of the City
Council establishing
Development District No. 1
and Tax Increment Pinancing
District No. 1-1 and adopting
the Development Program and
Tax Increment Pinancing
Plan relating thereto.
-Z•
DU
Planning Commission Agenda - 3/6/90
7. Public hearinq - Consideration of conditional use permit which
would allow development of a car wash and deli at the site of
the West Side Market. Applicants. Tom Holthaus. Matt and
Steve Holker. (J.O.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
If Planning Commission recommends approval of the rezoning
request changing site zoning from R-1 to PZM, then the
Planning Commission should consider granting a conditional use
permit which would allow operation of one or both of the
proposed uses. Under PZM zoning, operation of a deli and car
wash are allowed as conditional uses. Planning Commission may
elect to approve operation of one or both.
SITE PLAN REVIEW
The proposed site plan calls for development of a deli that
will seat 20 to 30 customers. Space necessary for the deli
will be created by building an addition to the north side of
the existing convenience store. The carwash facility is self -
operated. It will be located to the north of the deli.
The proposal meets all parking and setback requirements
associated with the PZM zone. The total number of parking
spaces needed for operation of the convenience store and the
deli equals 25. The proposal submitted shows 27 parking
spaces. In addition, the car wash portion of the development
requires sufficient car stacking for eight vehicles.
To the north of the development are split level, single family
residences. No changes to the existing buffer (six foot
fence) are planned to mitigate impact on adjoining residential
property to the north. Expected impacts to this area might
include increase in noise and congestion due to added traffic.
Some noise may be created by vacuum cleaners. It is not known
to what degree the noise will be a problem. There is
potential for a litter problem associated with car cleaning;
however, the fencing should help to keep the litter from
blowing into the residential neighborhood.
To the east of the development are single family houses. The
proposed site plan calls for a six-foot fence along with
existing vegetation to buffer this area from the impact of the
development. This area will experience the same affects as
the area to the north. The presence of the fence should
reduce the impact of headlamps shining into windows of
adjoining properties. Windows in upper floors of split level
residences will not be well screened from headlamp lights.
Planning Commission Agenda - 3/6/90
To the south of the development is Highway 75, and across the
highway is the elementary school. The proposed development
will increase traffic in the area beyond that which would have
otherwise been created. Adding traffic to a school/
residential area will contribute toward the opportunity for
accidents. To what extent increasing the opportunity of
accidents becomes a problem is not well understood.
ZONING ORDINANCE/COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
DECISION CRITERIA
Zoning Ordinance Amendment Decision Criteria
In reviewing a request for a conditional use permit, according
to chapter 22 of the zoning ordinance, the Planning Commission
shall consider possible adverse affects of the proposed
amendment. Its judgment shall be based upon (but not limited
to) the following factors: relationship to municipal
comprehensive plan; the geographical area involved; whether
such use will tend to or actually depreciate the area in which
it is proposed; the character of the surrounding area; and the
demonstrated need for such use. If the Planning Commission
recommends approval of the rezoning request, then it follows
that one or both of the conditional use permit requests have
been found to be acceptable in terms of the decision criteria
above.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS1
1. Motion to approve conditional use permit request which
would allow development of a deli and car wash in a PZM
zone contingent on the following:
1. The architectural appearance and functional plan of
the building and site shall not be so dissimilar to
the existing buildings or area as to cause
impairment in property values or constitute a
blighting influence within a reasonable distance of
the lot.
2. Magazining or stacking space is constructed to
accommodate that number of vehicles which can be
washed during a maximum thirty (30) minute period
and shall be subject to the approval of the City
Engineer.
3. At the boundaries of a residential district, a
strip of not lees than five (5) feet shall be
landscaped and screened in compliance with
Chapter 3, Section 2 (G), of this ordinance.
16
Planning Commission Agenda - 3/6/90
r
4. Each light standard island and all islands in the
parking lot landscaped or covered.
5. Parking or car magazine storage space shall be
screened from view of abutting residential
districts in compliance with Chapter 3,
Section 2 (G), of this ordinance.
6. The entire area other than occupied by the
buildings or plantings shall be surfaced with
material which will control dust and drainage which
is subject to the approval of the City Engineer.
7. The entire area shall have a drainage system which
is subject to the approval of the City Engineer.
8. All lighting shall be hooded and so directed that
the light source is not visible from the public
right-of-way or from an abutting residence and
shall be in compliance with Chapter 3,
Section 2 (H), of this ordinance.
9. Vehicular access pointe shall be limited, shall
create a minimum of conflict with through traffic
_ movement, and shall be subject to the approval of
the City Engineer.
10. All signing and informational or visual
communication devices shall be in compliance with
Chapter 3, Section 9, of this ordinance.
11. Provisions are made to control and reduce noise.
12. The provisions of Chapter 22 of this ordinance are
considered and satisfactorily met.
13. Car wash facility shall have direct access to major
thoroughfare via driveway or frontage road.
14. Intermittent sounds produced by car wash operation
such as the sound of a vacuum or warning signal
shall not be audible to users of adjoining PZM or
residential properties.
15. Hours of operation of the car wash facility shall
be limited to 7:00 AM to 9:00 PM.
16. All screening vegetation and fencing shall be
properly maintained. Vegetation that Was shall be
replaced. Fencing shall be painted regularly.
17
Planning Commission Agenda - 3/6/90
According to the City Planner, it is possible to
incorporate this type of development into a
highway/ residential area. He noted that it is very
important to require strong conditions. The list
of conditions above will serve to protect the
residential area from the negative effects of the
development.
2. Notion to deny conditional use permit request.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends alternative $1.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of site plan.
is
Planning Commission Agenda - 3/6/90
7. Public hearing - Consideration of reguest to rezone R-1
(single family residential) to PZM (performance zone mixed).
Applicant, Thomas Holthaus, Matt Holker, and Steve Holker.
owners of West Side Market. (J.O.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Planning Commission is asked to conduct a public hearing and
consider a request to rezone the West Side Market property
from its current R-1 zoning to a PZM designation. The request
stems from the developer's desire to utilize available land by
expanding the use of the property to include a deli and a car
wash, two uses which are not allowed in the R-1 zone but are
allowed in the PZN zone.
Following is a brief history of the development of the
property along with a site plan analysis and review of the
rezoning proposal in terms of decision criteria noted in the
comprehensive plan and in chapter 22 of the zoning ordinance.
DEVELOPMENT HISTORY
Prior to 1987, the site was known as "Charlie's West" Liquor
Lounge/Supper Club. The liquor lounge/supper club existed as
a legal non -conforming use grandfathered in when annexation
occurred. Early in 1987, Tom Holthaus requested that the City
allow him to develop a convenience store at the site. Even
though convenience stores are not allowed to operate in this
zone, the use was allowed to occur because changing the use
from supper club to convenience store lessens the level of
non -conformity. In making this decision, Chapter 3,
Section 1, Subdivision F, of the zoning ordinance was cited as
follows:
"A lawful, non -conforming use of a structure or a parcel of
land may be changed to lessen the non -conformity of use. Once
a non -conforming structure or parcel of land has been changed,
It shall not thereafter so be altered to increase the non-
conformity."
Holthaus and his partners now wish to further develop the
property for commercial purposes, which would serve to
increase the non -conformity; therefore, the property must be
rezoned before the commercial use of the property can
Intensify.
Planning Commission Agenda - 3/6/90
Although this is somewhat of a moot point, it should be noted
that other sections of the zoning ordinance that address
treatment of non -conforming uses were not brought forward
during the discussion in 1987 that may have impacted decision
making. For instance, even though the structure had not been
used for six months, the loss of Grandfather rights was not
considered. A case could have been made that the disuse of
the structure for this time period resulted in the property
losing all grandfather rights, which would have required that
the property be developed entirely consistent with the R-1
designation.
In addition, it probably could be demonstrated that the City
violated its own ordinance by allowing major refurbishment of
a non -conforming structure to occur. Section I of the
ordinance states that normal maintenance of a building or
other structure containing or related to a lawful non-
conforming use is permitted, including necessary non-
structural repairs and incidental alteration which do not
phvsicallv extend or intensifv the non -conforming use.
These points are not made to embarrass City sttff or Council
but are made to point out the fact that by allowing Charlie's
West to be entirely refurbished as a convenience store, the
City has extended the life of a "non -conforming" structure by
twenty years. In a sense, the decision to extend the life of
the non -conforming use could be interpreted as a recognition
that the property is suited to commercial or B-1 (neighborhood
business) use. If this is the City's intent, then the
property should be rezoned to reflect intent. If it is truly
the intent of the City to someday witness development of R-1
use of the property as it is now zoned, then the City should
not allow further commercial development on the site.
Please note that rezoning the property as requested does not
require that both proposed uses (car wash and deli) should be
allowed. If the rezoning request is approved, the City may
consider each use separately, which could result in the
granting of one or both of the conditional use requests.
PZM DISTRICT SUMMARY
It is proposed that the property be rezoned to PZM rather than
B-1 because a deli and a car wash are allowed as conditional
uses in the PZM zone while only the convenience store is
allowed in the 8-1 zone. Following is a summary of the land
use regulations for the PZM zone. Please review appropriate
sections of the ordinance for more detail.
Planning Commission Agenda - 3/6/90
v
"The purpose of the performance zoning district is to allow
for development flexibility and special design control within
sensitive areas of the City due to environmental physical
limitations. The performance zoning districts also attempt to
create a reasonable balance between the interest of the
property owner in freely developing his property and at the
same time protect the interest of surrounding properties." A
specific purpose of the PZM district is to provide a land use
transition between hiqh density residential land uses and low
intensity business uses, as well as the intermixing of each
such land use.
In this case, PZM zoning would be used as a transition area
between low (R-1) intensity residential land uses and low
intensity business use. A case could be made that PZM zoning
may not have been intended for this type of land use
transition.
Following are permitted uses in the PZM zone :
Those uses listed as permitted uses in the R-3 zoning
district.
Club or lodge without serving of food or beverage.
Following are conditional uses allowed in the PZM zone:
All conditional uses in R-3 zone.
Uses otherwise allowed as permitted uses in the B-1 zone
such as barber shops, beauty parlors, laundromat, and
convenience stores.
Uses otherwise allowed as permitted uses in the 8-2 zone
are also allowed as a conditional use such as hospitals,
medical clinics, dental offices, other office space,
nursing homes, deli, bank, bicycle repair, camera store,
drug store, florist shop, hardware, gift shop, and
assorted other "low intensity retail or service outlets."
The uses allowed as a conditional use 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.
e
Planning Commission Agenda - 3/6/90
SITE PLAN REVIEW
The site plan calls for development of a deli seating 20 to 30
people and calls for development of a four -stall self-service
car wash.
The site plan proposed is completely consistent with zoning
ordinance requirements associated with the proposed uses. The
details of the site plan will be discussed in greater detail
in conjunction with the conditional use permit request.
To the north of the development are split level, single family
residences. No changes to the existing buffer (six-foot
fence) are planned to mitigate impact on adjoining residential
property to the north. Expected impacts to this area might
include increase in noise and congestion due to added traffic.
Some noise may be created by vacuum cleaners. There is
potential for a litter problem associated with car cleaning.
To the east of the development are single family houses. The
proposed site plan calls for a six-foot fence along with
existing vegetation to buffer this area from the impact of the
development. This area will experience the same affects as
the area to the north. The presence of the fence should
reduce the impact of headlamps shining into windows of
adjoining properties. Windows in upper floors of split level
residences will not be well screened from headlamp lights.
To the south of the development is Highway 74, and across the
highway is the elementary school. The proposed development
will increase traffic in the area beyond that which would have
otherwise been created. Adding traffic to a school/
residential area will contribute toward the opportunity for
accidents. To what extent increasing the opportunity of
accidents becomes a problem is not well understood.
It should be noted that the Pinewood Elementary School will be
the site of an impressive play structure that may in of itself
draw considerable traffic above and beyond what the school
would normally generate. It is likely that the combination of
the play structure, convenience store, deli, and car wash will
create a significant node of commercial/recreation activity.
It to not difficult to envision dad dropping the kids off to
play while he washes the car. When the kids are done playing,
they run across Highway 73 and have a corn beef sandwich at
the deli. Planning Commission will have to ask itself, is
this a problem? Is this level of commercial activity
acceptable in an R-1 zone?
To the west of the site is Otter Creek Road and more R-1
property.
Planning Commission Agenda - 3/6/90
ZONING ORDINANCE/COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REZONING DECISION CRITERIA
Zoninq Ordinance Amendment Decision Criteria
In reviewing a rezoning request, according to chapter 22 of
the zoning ordinance, the Planning Commission shall consider
possible adverse affects of the proposed amendment. Its
judgment shall be based upon (but not limited to) the
following factors: relationship to municipal comprehensive
plan; the geographical area involved; whether such use will
tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is
proposed; the character of the surrounding area; the
demonstrated need for such use.
Following is a review of each decision criteria in terms of
this planning case.
1. Relationship to municipal comprehensive plan
As will be detailed later, the proposal to rezone this
property does not appear to be entirely consistent with
the comprehensive plan. At the same time, however, the
comprehensive plan contains language that provides some
flexibility. For instance, community development
policy !1 states, "the comprehensive plan is considered
to be a flexible guide to decision making rather than an
inflexible blueprint for development." Likewise, in
commercial policy statement i2 it states, "The
comprehensive plan, the zoning ordinance, and other
measures and procedures will be modified in realistic
recognition of the needs of contemporary commercial
entorprisos and the need to properly control such
enterprises at the local community level; commercial
developmentpolicy will not be rigid and inflexible, and
neither shail it be indiscriminately permissive."
Following are commorcial policies contained within the
comprehensive plan which may apply to this situation. Please
note that the policy statements below supporting
contralization of major commercial development may not
necessarily be in opposition to commercial development on a
limited scale. Please review and make your interpretation
accordingly.
COMMERCIAL POLICY #1
"Commercial development in general and successful retailing
functions should occur both in the central business district
and the shopping area contiguous to interstate 94."
10
Planning Commission Agenda - 3/6/90
COMMERCIAL POLICY t5
"Commercial areas should be as compact as possible. Compact
commercial areas are particularly advantageous for retail
uses, as they concentrate shopping and parking. A community
is benefited by reducing exposure to residential areas and
having a better control of parking and traffic needs. For
this reason, "strip" and "spot" commercial development should
not be permitted."
COMMERCIAL POLICY 08.
"All major commercial areas shall be pre -zoned based upon the
comprehensive plan. No areas shall be rezoned to commercial
use (PZM) unless they are shown to be properly located in
accordance with the policies and standards of the
Comprehensive Plan."
COMMERCIAL POLICY t9
"Boundaries of commercial districts shall be well-defined so
as to Drevent intrusion into residential areas; residential
areas must be properly screened from the associated 111
effects of adjacent and nearby commercial area."
THE GEOGRAPHY AND CHARACTER OF THE AREA INVOLVED
As noted earlier, the subject area is on a corner lot bounded
by a state highway, collector street, and residential
property. The highway location is good for visability and
customer access. At the same time, however, the subject area
is imbedded into an R-1 zone. There are many other areas in
town that have the same combination of highway access and R-1
or R-2 zoning. Approval of this proposal would likely set a
precedent for other applications for rezoning land within
residential areas.
If one examines the zoning map, it can be seen that there are
a number of existing PZM districts that border residential
districts. None of the PZM districts are completely
surrounded by R-1 districts as proposed.
WHETHER SUCH USE WILL TEND TO DEPRECIATE THE AREA
It is difficult to say if the development of a car wash and
deli would ultimately result in a lessening of the value of
adjoining property. The site plan landscaping and screening
features, if properly maintained, should mitigate most of the
direct negative effects. In addition, a neighborhood parking
problem will not be created by the development. At the same
time, the development will increase traffic and will
m
Planning Commission Agenda - 3/6/90
contribute toward creation of an environment that is not
consistent with an area originally designated as R-1. what
precise effect this will have on area land values is difficult
to say.
THE DEMONSTRATED NEED FOR SUCH USE
Is there a need for additional PEM zoning districts within
residential areas along mayor highways?
When considering a rezoning request, it's wise to ask, was
there a mistake in the development of the original zoning
ordinance which needs to be corrected? Should the rezoning be
allowed to occur because it will create a PEM zone that should
have been included in the original zoning map, or should this
rezoning request be denied because said action will simply
enable a property owner to fully utilize land for commercial
purposes even though such use is not consistent with the
original, valid intent of the zoning ordinance?
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to approve request to rezone said property from
R-1 to PZM. Motion based on the finding that the
rezoning is consistent with comprehensive plan,
geography, and character of area involved; the rezoning
will not tend to depreciate area involved; and there is
a demonstrated need for such use.
T. Motion to deny request to rezone said property from R-1
to PEM. Motion based on the finding that the rezoning is
not consistent with the comprehensive plan, geography,
and character of the area involved; the rezoning will
tend to depreciate the area involved; and there is no
demonstrated need for such use.
3. Motion to deny request to rezone said property from R-1
to PEM and call for a public hearing for the purpose of
considering rezoning from R-1 to B-1 (Neighborhood
Business District) and consider adding deli and car wash
to the list of conditional uses allowed in the B-1
district.
This alternative recognizes the convenience store as a
neighborhood business center and would not allow many of
the more intense uses listed in the PZM zone. In
addition, 8-1 district regulations do not allow
development of multiple family housing whereas PEM
regulations do. Following to the B-1 zone purpose as
outlined in the zoning ordinance:
12
Planning Commission Agendas - 3/6/90
"The purpose of the B-1 district is to provide for the
establishment of local centers for convenient, limited
office, retail or service outlets which deal directly
with the customer for whom the goods or services are
furnished. These centers are to provide services and
goods only for the surrounding neighborhoods and are not
intended to draw customers for the entire community."
Permitted land uses allowed in the B-1 district include
barber shop, beauty parlors, convenience stores,
laundromat.
Conditional uses include, government buildings,
commercial offices, and commercial planned unit
developments.
As you may have noticed, car wash and deli are not noted
as permitted or conditional uses in the B-1 designation.
The City could add these two uses to the B-1 zoning
designation via an ordinance amendment. In doing so, the
City could stay within the spirit of the B-1
(neighborhood, commercial) purpose by limiting the size
of a deli and carwash in the B-1 zone. Limiting the size
of each operation would limit service to a smaller,
neighborhood market.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION)
Planning Commission may wish to deny this request on the basis
that it is not consistent with the goals of the comprehensive
plan, which calls for commercial development to be centralized
as much as possible. Granted, a convenience store, deli, and
car wash are not major commercial developments; however, they
are not listed as neighborhood commercial either. Therefore,
the development represents a decentralization of commercial
activity, which in principal is inconsistent with the
comprehensive plan.
The original intent of the zoning ordinance called for
development of a purely residential neighborhood.
Unfortunately, a supper club pre -dated the zoning ordinance
and was grandfathered in as part of the residential
neighborhood. In response to an opportunity to lessen the
level of non -conformity, the City in 1987 allowed a
convenience store to be developed at the site. This action,
though not creating a conforming, permanent use allowed the
developers to refurbish their structure and be in position to
operate the convenience store for many years to come. To now
13
M
Planning Commission Agenda - 3/6/90
increase the level of business intensity because the land is
available at the site does not appear to be sufficient
justification to "re -intensify" the use of the property when
the original goal was to develop a purely residential
neighborhood.
On the other hand, by approving the development of the
convenience store, the City has recognized the area as a
neighborhood commercial area. Since that date, the store has
not created a neighborhood problem and probably should be
rezoned to B-1 at a minimum. The City could take the position
that development of the convenience store did not create a
neighborhood problem and adding a well -screened and regulated
car wash and deli may not create any more problems. If
Planning Commission is inclined to view this development as a
benign influence on the R-1 district, it is recommended that
alternative i3 be selected.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Area map.
Approval of this rezoning request may open the door to
requests for PZM zoning designation in other R-1 areae along
highways.
14
�= s
\•� �, A rezoning request to rezone an &-1
`S (single family residential) lot to
PZM (performance sone mixed) zone.
.•is/A - A conditional use request to allov
A e car rash in a PZM (performance sone
- .` •` / zed) sone.
IDE MARKET
s. L
-i
'+ ran.., .,�q r" `� .�'(l/•/!�JJ ,i��'^ !1�61•''h
`a r •011Y+:
I �tir�gar�
I 4
1 .O �•
N�QhM'AY •
r....-- i=------------- -----
1
( C' Q 1
f
l�- -- - -- - - If T