Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/10/09 Planning Commission Minutes Regular Meeting November 10, 2009 1. Call to Order Chair Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Rotty, Bonar, Kuyper, Vanderbeck Members Absent: Stokes Also Present: Tony Wippler - Assistant City Planner, Lee Smick - City Planner 2. Approval of Minutes a) October 13, 2009 Regular Meeting Minutes MOTION by Bonar, second by Rotty to approve the minutes. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 3. Public Hearings a) Conditional Use Permit to allow a church in the B-2 (Downtown Business) Zoning District. Applicant: Tme Vine Fellowship Ministries 115 Elm Street Farmington, MN 55024 True Vine Fellowship Ministries would like to open a church in the multi-tenant strip center located in the City Center development. The church would be located in Suite E. The property is about 1,200 square feet and it would be divided into an office, storage and worship areas. The property is zoned B-2 and churches are a conditional use in this district. This would be a change of use for the space and based upon the size and use of the property, the maximum occupancy for the space would be 49 persons, if occupancy goes to 50 or above the space would require a fire suppression system. The property owner does not plan to add fire suppression to the space at this time. A condition will be placed upon the Conditional Use Permit requiring that the maximum occupancy of 49 persons be posted on the site. There is adequate parking on site. Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit with the following contingencies: 1. A sign shall be posted in plain site within the space to be occupied that states the maximum allowed occupancy at any given time is 49 persons. 2; A sign permit application shall be required for any signage to be placed on site. There is currently a sign on the building that will require a sign permit. The building owner is aware of the maximum occupancy; however staff has not been able to reach the applicant to discuss this item. MOTION by Bonar, second by Vanderbeck to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION CARIED. MOTION by Kuyper, second by Vanderbeck to approve the Conditional Use Permit with the stated contingencies. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Planning Commission Minutes ~ovemberl0,2009 Page 2 b) An amendment to Title 11 of the Farmington City Code regarding the Subdivision Ordinance. Applicant: City of Farmington 430 Third Street Farmington, MN 55024 Through the platting process and the development process, the City of Farmington acquires certain parcels ofland specifically for stormwater facilities, trails, etc. In the past, the City has had some difficulty obtaining those parcels. The parcels are typically outlotted and when the plat is recorded the ownership is transferred to the City. However, since 2005 the City was developing at such a rapid pace that we were having a difficult time obtaining those deeds. In certain cases some of the ponds are not in the City's name. Staff would like to amend the subdivision ordinance so that the deed is transferred to the City automatically by requiring that the plat documents can not be recorded until we have received the deed. On the parcels that we have not received any ownership of, there has not been much need for upkeep as of yet, however the City is paying for that upkeep, if any, right now. The developments contracts state which lots are to be deeded to the City of Farmington, however at this time they do not define a set date. MOTION by Bonar, second by Kuyper to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Kuyper, second by Vanderbeck to recommend approval of the proposed amendments to the City Council. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 4. Discussion a) East Farmington 4th Addition discussion. The East Farmington Homeowners Association would like to discuss the pocket parks in the East Farmington 4th Addition. There are four square blocks in this Addition. The area contains 66 single family lots and the pocket parks were platted in the center of the blocks. In 2007 the homeowners in the 4th Addition seceded from the Homeowners Association (HOA) because the restrictive covenants agreement was never recorded by the developer. These property owners no longer pay dues to the association for maintenance, and the association is no longer maintaining these parks. The HOA is concerned about liability issues due to the fact hat they still own the park property; however they have not banned any of the property owners from using the property. At this time the HOA would like to release the park property to any of the adjoining property owners. They are proposing to split the pocket parks. Mr. Dennis Hanson, property manager for the HOA, and Keith Kristiansen, president of the HOA were present to discuss the property division. Mr. Hanson stated that they are looking for some help from the Planning Commission. The discovery that the 4th Addition was never recorded resulted from an attempt to collect past due association dues. All of the owners would have had to agree to become members of the association in order for the association to collect dues. The owners did not agree to join the association, and subsequently aligned and sued the association for past dues paid and that lawsuit has been settled. The pocket parks were designed for the dues to cover the required maintenance and Planning Commission Minutes ~ovemberl0,2009 Page 3 administration of the park space. These 4 pocket parks are essentially non- funded at this point. The play structures were removed to limit liability and the maintenance has been reduced to remove the financial burden for the rest of the association members. The grass is being cut once it is 11 inches tall and the irrigation system has been removed. The HOA has considered several options to solve the issue of the park properties. They would like to replat the lots and sell them to the adjacent landowners. Mr. Pellicci may be interested in purchasing Outlot B that abuts his property. As for Outlot A, they would like to subdivide the lot into two home sites to recover some of their losses, or if that is not possible, they would move to replat and keep it open space but to add it to adjacent landowner's properties. Outlots C & D are landlocked, so they would like to replat them into 6 different parcels to be offered to the adjacent property owners to purchase. There is unrest in the membership of the HOA due to the inequities that they interpret from the costs incurred for the parks that are not funded by the 4th Addition homeowners. The HOA is not able to continue with their improvement plans due to the money that they have lost throughout this process. This is their preliminary plan and they would like to see how the Planning Commission feels about the proposal. Chair Rotty spoke for the Commission stating that they do not get involved in HOA issues, but their direction would be for them to submit a formal proposal for the Commission to review. Staff will work with them on any issues that they perceive with the plan. b) VRC Update - Knutsen and Pedersen Drive transition from a private road to a public road. The City of Farmington is proposing to take possession ofOutlots Band E, where Knutsen and Pedersen Drives are located. The property owner will deed the outlots to the City after which they will become public streets. Knutsen Drive would remain with the same name, however, Pedersen Drive would have to fit into the Dakota County grid system and the name would be changed to Duval Way. MOTION by Vanderbeck, second by Kuyper to approve the proposed dedication and forward to the City Council. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. c) Variance & CUP for expansion of business on non-conforming lot - 511 Elm Street. Mr. Jim Bloemendal would like to expand the business, Immanuel Dental, which is located at 511 Elm Street. The property is zoned R -Tin which a clinic is a conditional use. The variance that would be required in this instance would be with regard to lot size. The non-residential lot must be 11,000 square feet minimum and the lot in question is 10,300 square feet in size. The expansion would be expanding a conditional use on a non-conforming lot. It appears that setbacks and lot coverage would not be an issue with this request. He would like to add onto the building to the north with a 1,254 square foot addition, essentially doubling what is there now. There would need to be adequate off street parking if they expand, which may also require a variance. Mr. Bloemendal stated that the dentist that currently occupies the space is looking to expand his practice in the future and this will require additional space. The property owner would build the shell and then the tenant would build it out with the appropriate equipment. Planning Commission Minutes ~ovemberlO,2009 Page 4 Chair Rotty stated that he would like to see the business be able to expand but the question is whether or not the parking needs can be accommodated. The Commission can't really say yes or no at this point because there would need to be a public hearing. The owner would need to work with staff to determine the parking needs as a next step. None of the Commissions stated that they were opposed to the expansion at this point. d) 2030 Comprehensive Plan Work Plan Update. Staff is providing the updated work plan and timeline, and also indication of what has been accomplished to date. 5. Adjourn MOTION by Vanderbeck, second by Kuyper to adjourn. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. ~ Approved