Planning Commission Agenda Packet 12-05-1995AGENDA
REGULAR,. , , ... - MONnCELLO PLANNING COBEMU ION
Tuesday, December 8,1898 - 7 p.m.
Members: Dido Frie, Richard Carlson, Jon Bogart, Dick Martie, Rod Dragsten
1. Call to order.
2. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting held November 8, 1995.
3. Consideration of adding items to the agenda.
4. Citizens comments.
5. Public Hearing --Consideration of granting a variance which would allow
filling of a. 10 -acre wetland in the scenic river shoreland district.
6. Public Hearing—Consideration of a conditional use permit which would allow
expansion of the wastewater treatment plant in a PZM zone.
7. Public Hearing --Consideration of a variance to the maximum square footage
allowed for a 2 -wall sign system. Applicant, Joyner Lanes.
8. Review subdivision request submitted by Everette Ellison. No action
requested --conceptual review only. Information to be provided at meeting.
9. Continue review of development framework document.
10. Adjournment.
MINUM
REGULAR bMMG - MONTICELLO PLANNING COD041MON
Wednesday, November 8, 1995 - 7 p.m.
Members Present: Chairman Dick Frie, Richard Carlson, Jon Bogart, Dick Martie,
Rod Drapten
Staff Present: Jeff O'Neill, Gary Anderson, Steve Grittman, Wanda Kraemer
1.n(`e o order.
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Frie.
COMMISSIONER DRAGSTEN MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE
MINUTES FOR THE SEPTEMBER 26, 1995 MEETING. SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER MARTIE. VOTING IN FAVOR: CHAIRMAN FRIE,
COMMISSIONER CARLSON. ABSTAINING: COMMISSIONER BOGART.
Motion passed.
COMMISSIONER MARTIE MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE
MINUTES FOR THE OCTOBER 3RD MEETING. SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER BOGART. Motion passed unanimously.
Cn aid rwtion of ed ing i ma �. 1+e e n w,
There were no items added to the agenda.
4. Ci iss, a comments,
There were no items added to the agenda.
V 11
11 .111: •11 �/1 :1
Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, reported that most of the Planning
Commission and City Council members are familiar with recent land use
decisions relating to the development of the Hillside Mall. The action
requested by the applicant stems from previous decisions relating to this
property. Specifically, on February 28, 1994, the applicant failed to obtain
sufficient votes necessary to get the toning approval needed which would
allow expansion of the PZM site and subsequent construction of additional
perking necessary to accommodate the expansion of a restaurant within the
Pegs 1 60
Planning Commission Minutes - 11/8/95
mall. However, the developer was able to obtain an amendment to the
conditional use permit which allowed the expansion of the restaurant in the
mall subject to a number of stipulations and conditions. One of the
conditions required that 9,100 sq R of the space available for occupancy
within the mall be left vaunt for the purpose of maintaining a parking
demand that matches the existing capacity of the parking lot. This option
was selected by the City Council at the request of the Hillside Partnership.
The attorney representing the Hillside Partnership suggested leaving 9,100
sq ft of retail space vacant, the site as it now exits could accommodate the
restaurant use along with existing uses on the site. He also noted that this
alternative would allow the restaurant facility to be established, which would
result in a better understanding of parking demand and patterns. This
practical information regarding parking demand would be useftil when
addressing full utilization of the structure at some point in the future. The
developer now wishes to bring the item forward again and to resolve the
parking so the entire building can be used.
Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, reported that as noted in the first
request, Hillside Partnership requests an amendment to their conditional use
permit which would allow utilization of 9,100 aq ft of available retail space
which had previously been withheld from use due to noncompliance with city
parking requirements. Under this site plan as proposed, the additional
parking spaces needed to meet code would be located in the rear of the
structure. The parking area would be constructed at such time that it is
demonstrated that the need for the parking spaces exists as noted in the
attache outline of the conditions associated with the permit.
Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, reported that if the Planning
Commission and City Council approve the concept of allowing the lower
portion of Lot 4, Block 1, Lauring Hillside Terrace, to be used for parking in
conjunction with the Hillside mail, then it should support the proposed
subdivision. If, on the other hand, the rezoning and conditional use permit
request are not approved, then this agenda item need not be considered.
Chairman Frie opened the public hearing on all three items.
John Greece, attorney fbr Hillside Partnership, along with Darryl Anderson
and Don Rachel, partners in Hillside Partnership attended the public
Page 2 0
Planning Commission Minutes - 11/8/95
hearing
John Greece stated that the council in the past did vote 3 to 1 in favor of the
request but a 4/5 vote was needed for approval. It has been a year and half
since that meeting and there is plenty of parking space available. The issue
was caused because the restaurant required more space than the retail
businesses. The restaurant has a different timing than the other stores and
the majority of the crowd is also there at different times than the retail
stores. Lot 4 would allow for a variation in parking spaces. It would not be
offensive to the comprehensive plan because it could not be used for
residential development.
Greece questioned that if Lot 4 could be combined with the mall then the
parking portion could be a long term lease, with the thought that if the
restaurant does leave the parking would not be needed.
Jeff O'Neill explained that this is the connection we are trying to make
because when lots are not combined there is a possibility of lots being sold
and the mall site left without enough parking.
Steve Grittman, City Planner, added that the City would prefer to see the
parking area subdivided instead of leasing because of the possibility of the
parking area being sold. In the future if it ever came to a situation that this
land was not used it could be subdivided back but a five floating piece of land
could be lost track of.
Chairman Me demonstrated an idea on the overhead. He explained that by
completing Palm Street, which is now a dead end, the traffic flow would
improve. This would also help the residential development on Palm Street.
The questions would be if the cost to the developer and the City would be
worth the completion of Palm Street.
Jeff O'Neill stated that a similar idea was proposed by Vaughn Veit, the
owner of the mall, but because of the major sanitary sewer and water lines in
this area the project was too costly. Chairman Frie's concept would be less
costly but still an added expense. The railroad crossing would be another
area that would have to be negotiated with Burlington Northern and this can
also be a very time consuming project.
John Greece stated that money is not made on perking and he felt the
railroad would fight the crossing, He could we benefits for the residential
lots but could not see the benefits fbr the mall to pursue the completion of
Palm Street. Greece stated that the timing of the parking construction could
be arbitrated by the Planning Commission if city staff and the developer
disagree as to the timing of the expansion.
Page 3
O
Planning Commission Minutes - 11/8/95
Chairman Frie questioned the room along the building for the exit lane.
Gary Anderson, Building Official, said there was adequate room for two can
to meet if necessary.
Chairman Frie closed the public hearing.
Chairman Carlson stated that he drove through the lot and there were about
25 can in the front and 8 in the back.
The Commissioners discussed and agreed that during the day there is more
parking in the front but the back lot is used more at night. The parking
seems to be adequate considering the variety of uses in the mall.
ROD DRAGSTEN MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO
THE ZONING MAP WHICH WOULD CHANGE THE ZONING DISTRICT
DESIGNATION OF A PORTION OF LOT 4, BLOCK 1, LAURING
HILLSIDE TERRACE ADDITION, FROM R-3 TO PZM BASED ON THE
FINDINGS THAT THE REZONING IS CONSISTENT WITH THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT
PLACING PZM/PARKING BEHIND THE R-3 USES WILL NOT RESULT IN
A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE R-3 USES. SECONDED BY DICK
MARTIE. Motion passed unanimously.
JON BOGART MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT WHICH WOULD ALLOW FULL USE OF THE HILLSIDE
PARTNERSHIP MALL SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. THE DEVELOPER SHALL PROVIDE PARKING, GRADING, AND
DRAINAGE PLANS SUPPORTING DEVELOPMENT OF AN
ADDITIONAL Be STALLS. PRIOR TO THE CITY GRANTING AN
OCCUPANCY PERMIT TO ANY OF THE RETAIL AREA
PREVIOUSLY OFF-LIMITS, THE DEVELOPER SHALL OBTAIN
WRITTEN APPROVAL OF THE PARKING, GRADING, AND
DRAINAGE PLANS FROM THE CITY ENGINEER.
THE DEVELOPER SHALL NOT BE REQUIRED TO INSTALL THE
PARKING AREA PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY OF THE NEW RETAIL
AREA; HOWEVER. A FINANCIAL GUARANTEE AND
ASSOCIATED AGREEMENT SHALL BE ESTABLISHED THAT
WOULD ALLOW THE PARKING LOT AND ASSOCIATED
REQUIRED LANDSCAPING TO BE INSTALLED AT THE
DISCRETION OF THE CITY AT THE FULL COST OF THE
DEVELOPER. A LETTER OF CREDIT THAT IS AUTOMATICALLY
RENEWED EACH YEAR WILL BE REQUIRED.
Page 4 0
Planning Commission Minutes - 1118M
3. THE PORTION OF LOT 4, BLOCK 1, LAURING HILLSIDE
TERRACE, NEEDED FOR PARKING SHALL BE SPLIT AWAY
FROM LOT 4, BLOCK 1, AND ADDED TO THE HILLSIDE MALL
PROPERTY.
4. PRIOR TO THE CITY GRANTING OCCUPANCY OF THE UNUSED
RETAIL AREA, THE DEVELOPER SHALL PROVIDE A
LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING PLAN THAT MEETS THE
REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY AS APPROVED BY CrrY STAFF.
Z. ALL OTHER CONDITIONS AS NOTED BY ORDINANCE AND
INCLUDED IN PREVIOUS CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS ISSUED.
6. PARKING ALONG THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING SHALL BE
LIMITED TO 15 -MINUTE PARKING ONLY AND SIGNED
ACCORDINGLY.
7. ADDITIONAL LIGHTING SHALL BE PROVIDED IN THE REAR OF
THE FACILITY TO IMPROVE SECURITY.
SECONDED BY RICHARD CARLSON. Motion passed unanimously.
RICHARD MARTIE MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE REQUEST TO
SUBDIVIDE A PORTION OF LOT 4, BLOCK 1, LAURINO HILIAIDE
TERRACE. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BOGART, Motion passed
unanimously.
The applicant, Monticello Recreation IncJPam Dane requested this item be
tabled.
Steve Grittman, City Planner, gave an update on the progress of the
comprehensive plan. He went through the entire framework of the plan and
asked if the Commissioner'a wanted to discuss it tonight or at tine next
meeting?
Tba Commissioners agreed that a special meeting would be better so they
odd all read it in more detail and be ready with comments but because or
the Downtown Redevelopment meeting the next week and Tharskegiving the
tbpowing the next comprehensive meeting would be at the next regular
Planning Commission meeting.
Page 5 Q
Planning Commission Minutes - 11/8/95
The Planning Commission did direct staff to give an update to the City
Council that because of the busy schedule that the workshops for discussion
with the council will be scheduled in January.
10. Review jdanni and rr�ng anr+limtion w nriwla
Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, explained that Chairman Frie had
inquired about the information available at City Hall for residents
requesting a public hearing application that is the reason the Commissioners
were sent the samples in their agenda packets. This is a process that is
continually being updated and improved Chairman Frie commented that
City Staff was up to speed on the handouts.
11. Review downtown mdoyrImment activities- Lhiwntnzmjzdmmhwnu=
mee ' g witch downtown redevel[rom�anesalist - November 19L 1995_
m i�ol+ Srbool nwna .n nrw,
Jeff O Neill, Assistant Administrator, informed the Commissioners that a
presentation on riverfront and downtown redevelopment would be presented
by Theresa Washburn. Theresa Washburn was a speaker at the Minnesota
State Planning Conference and was hired by the HRA to give her strategies
and specific approaches on the revitalisation of downtown.
"- ' 12. Adjournment.
DICK MARTIE MADE A MOTION TO ADJOURN THE MEETING.
SECONDED BY JON BOGART. Motion passed unanimously.
ResepecdUy submitted,
Wanda Kraemer
Development Services Technician
Page 6 O
Planning Commission Agenda - 12W5
I+��.T:r
RiTlTifi"!!
• M
Planning Commission is asked to consider granting a variance to the zoning
code which would allow filling of a small wetland in conjunction with the
expansion of the wastewater treatment plant. The wetland appears to be the
result of a spring that flows out of the valley wall. It is located along the
eastern boundary of the property line. According to Public Works Director
John Simola, it is not possible to avoid impacting the wetland even though
most of it is located within the required setback area.
Development or filling of wetland is regulated by both the zoning ordinance
and via the 1891 State Wetland A& Under the zoning ordinance, a variance
is needed to allow filling of the wetland to occur. Under the State Wetland
Act, this particular wetland is exempted f from the strict rules limiting filling
due to the fact that it is less than .5 acres and the filling is needed to
accommodate a public utility projA however, the rules do require that the
impact be limited as much as possible. Given the constraints of the site,
according to John Simola, it is impossible to build the necessary
improvements on the site without impacting the wetland.
There is land available within the existing site to store storm water run -A
thus creating a wetland area that is not present today. Creation of this pond
is not a requirement of the Wetland Act but could serve to meet the spirit of
the "no net loss' goals of the Wetland Act and serve as an additional
justification for the variance.
B. ALTERNATME ACTIONS:
Motion to approve the variance request which would allow filling of a
small wetland in conjunction with expansion of the wastewater
treatment plant. Motion is based on the finding that use of the
property for the intended purpose is not possible without a variance. A
wetland will be created at a new location, and the variance is
justifiable based on the tact that it is exempted from the State Wetland
Act regulations limiting the filling of wetlands.
Planning Commission Agenda - 1Z%M
Under this alternative, the precedent set by granting the variance is
limited by the fact that in future cases, the Wetland Act will apply.
For instance, the wetland in question is also located on Floyd Kruse's
property. When Kruse requests to develop his site for residential
purposes, he will likely say that his property is not developable
without a variance to the zoning code. His arguments for the variance
will be moot because the Wetland Act will not allow filling of the
wetland for residential purposes without a mitigation plan.
Motion to deny the variance request which would allow filling of a
small wetland in conjunction with expansion of the wastewater
treatment plant. Motion is based on a finding that a hardship has not
been demonstrated.
The wetland is located along the boundary of the property and much of
it is within the required setback area. Perhaps eHbrts could be made
to preserve as much of the wetland as possible. This is not likely to be
possible given the limited area provided on site for development of the
facility. More detail regarding the feasibility of this option will be
provided by John Simola.
C_ ffrAFF RECOMMENDATION;
Staff recommends alternative 01 for reasons identified above.
D_ RUPPORTINO DATA--
Wetland
ATAWetland Act exemption information; Map showing location of wetland --
identified on the site plan with the next agenda item.
06/09/93 (REVISOR 1 PER/JC AR2120
1 B approved
aMovew
1
is not required for:
2
(10) activities in a wetland created solely as a result oft
3
(1) beaver dam construction;
d
(ii) blockage of culverts through roadways maintained.by a
5
public or private entity;
6
(iii) actions by public entities that were taken for a
7
purpose other than creating the wetlandr or
e
(iv) any combination of li) to (iii).
9
Wetland areas created by beaver activities may be drained
t1
10
by removing those materials placed by beaver. Drainage is
+V
\�
11
permitted by removing or moving materials blocking installed
C
12
roadway culverts and drainage structures. Additional excavation
13
or removal of other materials is not permitted unless it can be
16
shown by aerial photographs that the proposed activity will not
15
drain or fill wetland that was there before the beaver dam was
16
built or the culvert became plugged.
17
wetlands may be drained or filled it the landowner can show
19
that the wetland was created solely by actions the purpose of
19
which was not to create the wetland and were approved.
20
permitted, funded, or overseen by a public entity.
21
impoundments or excavations constructed in nonwetlands
22
solely for the purpose of effluent treatment, storm water
23
retention, soil and water conservation practices, and water
24
quality improvements, and not as part of a compensatory watland
25
mitigation process that my, over time, take on wetland
26
characteristics, are also exempted.
77
auop. 11. ration (11). A replacement plan for wetlands
26
is not required torr
29
(11) placntsnt, malatenance, repair, enhancement, or
70
replacesant of utility or utility—type service, including the
31
transmission, distribution, or furnishing, at wholesale or
22
re tall, of natural or manufactured gas, electricity, telephone,
\
21
or radio service of C—nications its
J/
74
(1) the impacts of the proposed project on the hydrologic
36
and biological characteristics of the wetland have been avoided
16
and minimized to the •atent possible. and
1 B approved
aMovew
06/09/9; (REVISOR ) PER/JC AR2120
1 (11( the proposed project significantly modifies or alters
2 less than one-half acre of wetlands.
l For new repieeement placement and enhancement of existing
facilities, the utility must demonstrate that the character and
5 extent of the impacts of the proposed project on the wetlands
I6 have been minimised and that the entire project will,
7 cumulatively, drain or fill less than one-half acre of wetland.
6 For maintenance, repair, and replacement, the local
9 government unit may issue a seasonal or annual exemption
10 certification or the utility may proceed without local
11 government unit certification if it is carrying out the work
12 according to best management practices. Work of an emergency
13 nature may proceed as necessary and any drain or fill activities
la shall be addressed with the local government unit after the
15 emergency work has been completed.
16 Subp. 12. Zxemption (12). A replacement plan for wetlands
17 is not required fort
is (12) activities associated with routine maintenance of
19 utility and pipeline rights-of-way, provided the activities do
20 not result in additional intrusion into the wetland.
21 This exemption is for maintenance, but not expansion, of
22 the rights-of-way in which utilities are located. Spill
21 remediation is not routine maintenance.
24 The local government unit may issue a seasonal or annual
25 exemption certification or the utility may proceed if it is
26 carrying out the work according to best management practices.
27 Work of an emergency nature may proceed as necessary and any
26 drain or fill activities shall be addressed with the local
29 government unit after the emergency work has been completed.
10 Subp. 11. Oneptioh 111). A replacement plan for wetlands
11 is not required fort
12 (11) alteration of a wetland associated with the operation,
11 maintenance, or repair of an interstate pipeline within all
11 existing or acquired interstate miceline riehts-of-way.
15 This exemption includes construction activities.
16 Subp. 14. txetption (14). A replacement plan for wetlands
19 ��
q AsvNer
06/09/93 [REVISOR J PER/JC AR2120
1 lost at an impacted wetland.
�I
2 Subp. 46v 41. Restoration. "Restoration" means
3 reestablishment of an area that was historically wetlands but
4 currently provides no or minimal wetland functions due
5 to manmade alteration such as filling or drainage.
6 Subp. 43T 46. Right-of-way acreage. "Right-of-way acreage"
7 has the meaning given it in Minnesota Statutes, section
S 103E.265, subdivision 6.
9 Subp. 40T 43. Riverine wetland. "Riverine wetland' means
30 a wetland contained within the banks of a channel that may
11 contain moving water or that forms a connecting link between two
12 bodies of standing water.
13 Subp. 43, 46. Sat aside. "Set aside' means the cropland
14 acreage annually retired as a condition to landowner
15 participation in United States Department of Agriculture
16 commodity programs.
17 Subp. 44v 45. Silviculture. *Silviculture" means the
1
16 scientific management of forest trees.
19 Subp. 45v 46. Sall and water conservation district. "Soil
20 and water conservation district' means a legal subdivision of
21 state government under Minnesota Statutes. chapter 107C.
22 Subp. 46v 47. Sall Conservation Service. "Soil
23 Conservation Service" Beane an agency of the United States
24 Department of Agriculture.
25 Subp. 49v 4ey Tributary wetland. "Tributary atland"
26 means a wetland with a well defined outlet, including the
27 systems, ditches, or natural watercourses, but without a well
26 dofI
2 Subp. 46v 49. Utility. "Utility" means a.ganitsry sear.
70 storm sewer, potable water distribution, and transmission,
71 distribution, or furnishing, at wholesale or retail, of natural
72 or-nufactured gas. electricity, telephone, or radio service or
33 c..,1estions.
y 34 Subp. 49v IL Watershed. "Natorshed" scans the 61 major
35 watershed units delineated by the map "Rtat• of Ninrasots
36 Watershed Boundaries . 1979" as produced by the Minnesota
6
Ammons
a Maurer
Planning Commission Agenda - 12/6196
Planning Commission is asked to consider recommending approval of a
conditional use permit which would allow expansion of the wastewater
treatment plant. Following is a brief review of the site plan followed by a list
of development conditions.
The size of the site is approximately 4.1 acres of undisturbed river valley
upland and valley lowland. To the west of the site is the existing facility, to
the east is undeveloped river lowland and upland owned by Floyd Kruse, to
the north is the river, and to the south is Hart Boulevard/CSAH 76. The
Kruse property is zoned for PZM, uses which makes it eligible for housing or
commercial uses. It is likely that the high side of the Kruse property on the
CSAH 76 side will be used for multi -family or commercial purposes. It may
be possible but difficult to develop single f unily home sites on the lower side
of the property. The plant site plan and associated buffer yard has been
designed with these adjacent land uses in mind. The eastern boundary of the
property will include development of a chain link fence and evergreen tree
plantings in an effort to buffer the impact of the SBR tanks that will rise up
94 R higher than the grade of the single family area to the east.
Dense vegetation along the western boundary of the existing site creates an
adequate buffer yard between the existing plant and the property owned by
John Bondhus.
The development of the site will have a significant inevitable impact on the
natural landscape. Complete clear -cutting will occur up to 60 ft from the
rivers edge. Considerable grading will also be necessary due to steep grades
and difficult grade transitions between the Kruse property and the site. The
top of the SBR tanks will rise to an elevation equal to the top of the wall of
the existing sludge storage tank (elev. 940). It is expected that the tanks will
have a significant visual impact. Efforts to limit this impact will be made via
preservation of as many existing trees as possible and via planting of new
trees. As viewed from the river, the tanks will rise 47 ft but will be set back
about 276 it. As noted above, trees will remain for the first 60 R from the
river. The remaining trees between the 60 -ft line and the tanks will be lost
in the construction process. According to John Simola, this area 1176 RI is
needed for project staging, 811 placement, etc.
Planning Commission Agenda - 12/6/96
The administration building will be an attractive masonry building. Fifteen
new parking spaces will also be added, which is adequate to handle current
staff (4) and visitors. The entire process facility will be fenced and secured.
The headworks building at the south end of the SBR tanks will be an
attractive gable -roofed concrete burnished block building, which will rise
above the SBR tanks and provide screening.
The expansion plans call for eigniHcant efforts to control odor problems. It is
expected that the new enlarged facility will result in a reduction in odor
problems. At the meeting, John Simola will outline specific design features
that will be employed to help control odors.
According to the City's pathway plan, there will be a pathway along the river
that will conned Mississippi Drive to the Hospital District/Ellison Park area.
The site plan as proposed accommodates the future extension of this
pathway.
B_ ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to approve a conditional use permit which would allow
expansion of the wastewater treatment plant in a PZM zone subject to
the following conditions:
Items required by code:
A. Conformity with the surrounding neighborhood is
maintained, and required setbacks and side yard
requirements are met.
B. Adequate screening from neighboring uses and
landscaping is provided in accordance with
Chapter 3, Section 2, of the zoning ordinance.
C. The provisions of Chapter 22 of the zoning
ordinance are considered and satisfactorily met.
D. The facility must have direct acoess to county or
city state aid highway.
Installation of odor control measures necessary to
maintain or reduce the current problem.
Planning Commission Agenda - 1715/95
No tree dear -cutting to occur within 50 ft of the rivers
edge.
City buffer yard requirements must be met on the Kruse
side of the property. Top side buffer yard to buffer
institutional/multi-family. Lower side to buffer
institutional use/single family.
This motion could be based on the finding that the f tcility is
consistent with the character of the area and the screening and
landscaping are designed to preserve to the extent possible the value of
the adjoining property. The proposal is consistent with the
comprehensive plan for the city. The expansion will not have an
appreciable effect on the property to the west (Bondhus). Screening
and buffer yard techniques will be employed to limit impact on the
Kruse property, and odor control efforts have been designed into the
plans. Although the natural features of the site will be severely
affected, the 60 -ft setback from the river will help to preserve the
natural quality of the shoreline.
2. Motion to deny approval of a conditional use permit which would allow
expansion of the wastewater treatment plant in a PZM zone.
Planning Commission should select this alternative based on a funding
that the facility as proposed is not consistent with the nature and
character of the area, will result in depredation of adjoining land
values, or is not consistent with the comprehensive plan for the city.
It is our view that the site plan as proposed, along with odor control
measures, will result in a land use that is compatible with adjoining
properties. The measures noted above will serve to mitigate new impacts
created by the expansion and reduce existing odor probloms; therefore, staff
recommends approval.
Site plan; Comprehensive plan excerpts.
LITY POLICIES
As urban development proceeds, adequate plans will be made for
the increased storm water run-off that can be expected; to the
extent feasible, such water will be impounded to help recharge
the area's ground water supply. Drainage plans will be
coordinated on a watershed basis.
Where on-site sewer and water facilities are to be used, soil
percolation tests shall be required when considered necessary
and there is evidence to indicate that larger lot sizes may be
required or development should be permitted for reasons of
danger to the public and health.
Attempt to design and encourage the use of gravity flow for
sanitary sewer systems rather than using lift stations and force
mains for long-term sewage solutions. Lift stations and force
mains may be appropriate as interim solutions to sewage problems
that may be served by gravity flow at a later date.
select routes for utilities, either above or below ground, with
careful regard for the preservation of natural resources, ouch
as wetlands, extreme slopes, water sources, and other wildlife
habitat.
Restore the 'nature" of the land which has been altered by
construction work to the extent possible as soon after
construction is completed.
Prohibit extension of sewer systems into areas where development
should not occur, such as flood plains and designated open
spaces. In certain instances, sewers may, of necessity, have to
traverse such areas in order to serve upland areas. However,
connection to the line should not be allowed in those areas.
Privately owned sanitary sewer systems should be prohibited.
Under certain circumstances, outface water run-off may require
consideration of a treatment system to assure the quality of
effluent diochargoo into water bod ies or waterways.
Municipal utilities should not be extended beyond the corporate
limits of the City.
The City shall actively participate in induotrial and commercial
growth to ensure conformance with treatment and pre-treatmont
requirements, in order to enhance maintenance and operation, and
to protect and prolong the lifeexpootancy of the Wastewater
Treatment Plan.
The extension of privately owned sewer and water linea beyond an
individual's property line in order to tie into municipal maino
shall be prohibited.
0
�j
COMMUNITY FACILITIES POLICY
1.
Presently, the development of land for public facilities such as
parks and playgrounds is considered more important than the
acquisition of such land. However, with respect to acquisition,
land must be purchased before proper sites are usurped by
private developments or high land prices make acquisition
unfeasible. It is a desirable goal of the City to balance
acquisition and development efforts.
2.
All public facilities are to be developed according to generally
j
accepted standards and the results of thorough study.
3.
Where feasible, private developers will be required to set aside
a portion of their land for public uses where this is not
feasible or desirable, developers will be required to contribute -
cash in lieu of land, with such money to be utilized for the
purchase and development of recreational facilities.
I
1 a.
School facilities should be fully utilized by making building
and land available to the public for use when such does not
function
,II
conflict with normal of the school facilities.
S.
Private developers will not be required to donate land for
�
school sites.
6.
s
Churches should have an ample site for building, landscaping,
potential expansion, and off-street parking. Parking should be
provided on the maximum design capacity. Churches should be
located adjacent to a thoroughfare or collector street and have
easy access to the area served. They should not be located on
minor residential streets and in the midst of residential
i
neighborhoods.
7.
The City should not accept substandard lands such as swamps,
power line easements, etc., for the development of park lands.
This shall include lands laid out in subdivision plans.
Oven 8oace Policies
Before delineating open space policies, a definition of the term is
necessary. Traditionally, open space has been primarily defined as
that area which is retained in or restored to a condition where
natural oyatema predominate and which may be used for recreation, or
preservation purposes. Open apace was often regarded as a separate
and contained entity usually under the ownership of a governmental
jurisdiction.
Recent trends indicate that open space, like the people it serves, is
becoming more directly integrated with its surroundings. Becoming
more a part of the total urban fabric, open space to being more
closely integrated into the urban living and working environment.
Because of this integrating phenomenon, many of the advantageo and
responsibilities of open space are equally applicable to public and
private lands.
Planning Commission Agenda - MM
7. PnhLic Hearing-.['nnatderatlon
fotage allowed for a 2 -wall Ago gy" m_ ApgdicanL Tnyner Tanes.
(J.O.)
A F.FF RF.N .. BACKGROUND:
Pam Dane, operator of Joyner Lanes, is proposing to modify the sign system
advertising Joyner Lanes and other entertainment and dining services
provided at the facility. The current sign system is non -conforming; however,
its establishment pre -dates the toning ordinance; therefore, it is a lawful
non -conforming sign. According to ordinance, when a lawful nonconforming
sign system is updated, it must be updated in a fashion that brings it into
compliance with city code.
The proposal set forth by Pam Dane does not bring the overall sign system
into compliance with code; however, it does significantly reduce the current
level of non -conformity. The existing sign system consists of three signs,
which include a 360 sq It sign on the Chelsea Road side, a 128 aq ft sign on
the Tbomas Park side of the facility, and a 40 sq ft pylon sign. Total sign
area at the aite amounts to 526 sq ft. An interpretation of current code would
indicate that total sign area square footage allowable at this facility is
300 sq ft; therefore, the current sign system is out of compliance by 228 aq ft.
Under the proposed sign system prepared by Dane, the 360 aq ft wall sign
(Joyner Lanes) on the Chelsea Road side would remain as is. Pam Dane has
indicated that she would prefer to leave the Joyner Lanes sign in place
because of the difficulty in repairing the steel wall after the sign is removed.
She also noted that the presence of the relatively large sign on the large
expanse of the steel wall helps to break up the appearance of the steel wall.
Reducing the site of the sign will result in a negative impact on the
appearance of the wall by exposing more flat steel surface to a view from the
street.
The proposed sign system calls for removal of the painted sign on the Thomas
Park side and replacement with a 100 eq ft back -lit sign that would identify
Joyner Lanes and the presence of Illusions Lounge and AJ'a Steak House/
Pizza. In addition, a reader board would be installed to take the place of the
pylon sign that would be removed under the proposed sign system.
The total square footage of all signs under this proposal amounts to 460 sq ft,
which would require a variance of 160 aq ft in order to be in compliance with
code. As compared to the existing sign system, the proposal results in a
reduction in total sign area of 65 eq ft Putting it another way, in order for
Planning Commission Agenda - 1215/95
the sign system to be in compliance with code, the Joyner Lanes sign on the
Chelsea Road side would need to be reduced in size from 360 sq ft to
200 sq ft.
As you know, in order to blunt a precedent by allowing variances, there
needs to be established some unique circumstance or hardship that could be
used to justify granting the variance, or there has to be the finding that the
proposed variance as granted does not violate the intent of the ordinance.
Motion to deny the variance request based on the finding that a
unique situation or hardship has not been demonstrated; therefore,
approving the variance would violate the intent of the ordinance.
Under this alternative, the Planning Commission would deny the
approval of the variance based on the finding that no unique hardship
or situation exists that would prohibit the owner from bringing the
total sign system into compliance with code. The argument that it will
be difficult to seal the building or fix the steel walls after the larger
Joyner Lanes sign is removed may not be strong enough to be viewed
as a bona fide hardship, as it is certainly feasible and possible to plug
the holes and refinish the sides of the structure once the sign is
removed. Accepting this problem as a hardship would set a precedent
that would allow any other business to obtain a variance f1rom
updating the sign system when they could prove that there would be
some cost associated with replacement of the existing non -conforming
sign.
Motion to grant a variance of 160 eq ft to the total sign area allowed
based on the finding that the updated sign system results in an
improvement and a reduction in the level of non-cenformity and that a
sufficient hardship has been demonstrated.
It is clear that the proposed sign system represents a big improvement
over the existing sign system. The temporary reader board in front
will be removed and replaced with a reader board on the Thomas Park
wall. The existing painted sign will be improved through
establishment of a nice backlit sign. The total square footage of the
overall sign system will be reduced by 65 eq ft, thereby bringing the
system into greater compliance with code.
Planning Commission Agenda - 1ZW5
Finally, the Joyner lanes sign on the Chelsea Road side, though in
exam of the total sign area allowed, if removed would not necessarily
appear to have a positive effect on the appearance of the Chelsea side
of the structure; therefore, to require it to be reduced in size, though
bringing it into compliance with code, would not necessarily have a net
positive effect on the appearance of the site itself. This reason for
granting the variance, of course, is a sub*Uve measure that, if used
as a rationale for granting the variance, could set a precedent.
From a City staff standpoint, we believe that the proposed sign system
results in an improvement over the existing sign system; however, we are
concerned about the precedent that would be set by allowing the total sign
system to remain in non -complicate as proposed. If the Planning
Commission is inclined to approve the proposal and associated variance, then
a creative finding needs to be identified that reduces the effect of the
precedent.
D_ SIIPPnRTING DATAi
Sign detail; Pictures will be provided at the meeting.
i
.r,GariP
0
lyrj�r' 0 1
ih....•. P�,k 5,.ae
of Ste—ti,%t4
J �rl+�fjl Ail►%/., o../ - S,jw Apt c, t6 .I. O
,?. R+»law•• E..•f;b A..Ao*f:�wt
3.
-so y%4* W%4t Is3A lto
Gir.'awbla Siad i+rw.✓�� f�"+
MICROFILM TITLE PAGE
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Planning Commission
Agenda Books
1996