HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/11/12City of Farmington
430 Third Street
Farmington, MN 55024
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
a) November 13, 2012 Regular Meeting
3. PUBLIC HEARINGS
4. DISCUSSION
AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION
December 11, 2012
7:00 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
a) An ordinance amending Section 10- 6- 3(B)1(g) of the City Code increasing the size of window signs allowed.
Applicant: City of Farmington
430 Third Street
Farmington, MN 55024
a) Sunrise Ponds possible replat
b) Dakota County Lumber Expansion Sketch Plan Possible Variance 28 8 Street
5. ADJOURN
A Proud Past A Promising Future
Committed to Providing High Quality,
Timely and Responsive Service to All
Of Our Customers
INTRODUCTION
DISCUSSION
Lakeville 25%
Burnsville 35%
Shakopee 50%
Rosemount 30%
Apple Valley 50%
Prior Lake No limit
ACTION REQUESTED
Respectfully submitted,
6( A S 2
Tony Wippler, As qstant City Planner
City of Farmington
430 Third Street
Farmington, Minnesota
651.280.6800 Fax 651.280.6899
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Tony Wippler, Assistant City Planner
SUBJECT: An ordinance amending Section 10- 6- 3(B)1(g) of the City Code increasing the size of window signs
allowed
DATE: December 11, 2012
Attached for the Commission's consideration is an ordinance amending 10- 6- 3(B)1(g) of the City's sign code proposing an increase to
the size of window signs allowed.
Staff has been approached by a new business owner within the downtown who wants to utilize up to 40% of each window of the
building he is occupying at 305 Elm Street with painted window signs. At this time, Section 10- 6- 3(B)1(g) of the City's sign code
states that "Permanent signs printed or otherwise displayed from the inside surface on an individual window shall not exceed two (2)
square feet or twenty five percent (25 of the total window area, whichever is greater." This code has been in effect since 1986.
With the attached ordinance, staff is proposing increasing the percentage of a window that a widow sign can occupy to forty percent
(40 of the total window area. Staff is suggesting that the two (2) square foot provision remain. Additionally, staff is proposing
revising the language to clarify that a window sign is a print, painting or other display located on any surface (whether inside or
outside) of an individual window as compared to just the "inside surface" of an individual window as currently specified in the code.
Staff has researched other communities in the area to determine their allowance of window sign percentages. These percentages are
shown below:
The Planning Commission briefly reviewed and discussed increasing the size of window signs at its regular meeting on November 13,
2012 and was generally in favor of allowing the increase to 40
Recommend approval of the attached ordinance amending Section 10- 6- 3(B)1(g) of the City Code increasing the size of window signs
allowed and forward that recommendation on to the City Council.
10 -6 -3: SIGNS AND BILLBOARDS:
1. Signs Permitted In All Zoning Districts:
ORDINANCE NO.
CITY OF FARMINGTON
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 10- 6- 3(B)1(g)
OF THE CITY CODE INCREASING THE SIZE
OF WINDOW SIGNS ALLOWED
THE CITY COUNICL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. Section 10- 6- 3(B)1(g) is amended by removing the strikes language and adding the
underlined language below as follows:
(B) Signs Permitted: Upon the adoption of this section, it shall be unlawful and a violation of this section
for any person to erect, construct, paint, alter, relocate, reconstruct, display, or maintain or cause to be
erected, constructed, displayed or maintained within the city of Farmington any sign without first
having obtained a permit from the zoning officer. (Ord. 010 -619, 3 -1 -2010)
(g) Window: Permanent signs printed or otherwise displayed from the inside surface of en an
individual window shall not exceed two (2) square feet or twenty five percent (25 forty
percent (40 of the total window area, whichever is greater.
SECTION 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage and publication according
to law.
ADOPTED this day of 20 by the City Council of the City of Farmington.
CITY OF FARMINGTON
By:
Todd Larson, Mayor
ATTEST:
Approved as to form the day of 20
By:
David McKnight, City Administrator
By:
City Attorney
Published in the Farmington Independent the day of 20
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
INTRODUCTION
DISCUSSION
History
Attached, for discussion purposes, are three proposals for a possible replat of the Sunrise Ponds development that is
generally located north of 213 Street and west of Cambodia Avenue.
Sunrise Ponds was originally platted in 2006 by Bridgeland Development Company as a Planned Unit Development. The
subdivision was platted as a two phase development with the initial phase consisting of fifty -six (56) single- family lots
that range in size from 3,373 square feet to 10,478 square feet. Additionally, lot widths range from thirty-six (36) feet to
forty-six (46) feet. The internal road system consists of private roads platted as an outlot (Outlot A as shown in Exhibit A
original plat) with a right -of -way width of thirty-two (32) feet and road width of the same.
Current state of subdivision
City of Farmington
430 Third Street
Farmington, Minnesota
651.280.6800 Fax 651.280.6899
www ci.farmington.mn.us
Planning Commission
Tony Wippler, Assistant City Planner
Sunrise Ponds possible replat
December 11, 2012
The subdivision currently has nine (9) homes built, all towards the southern end of the development. Premier Bank has
since taken ownership of the development and is exploring ways to make the development more marketable. Jacobson
Engineering, on behalf of Premier Bank, has provided three potential replat options that staff would like to discuss with
the Commission. A description of these options are as follows:
Option 1 shown as Exhibit B, consists of 73 lots. The widths of many of the lots would be increased to 50 feet in
width. The 18 lots on the southern end of the development, adjacent to Bristol Square, along with lots 1, 2 and 3
adjacent to the alley would remain smaller as originally platted due to the location of the existing homes in the
development. The roadways in this proposal would become public streets. The right -of -way widths would be
increased to 50 feet in the majority of the development except on the southern most road where the right -of -way
would be 45 feet in width. This again, is due in large part to the existing homes that are located in this portion of
the development. It should also be noted that the roadway is not entirely centered in the ROW with this proposal,
specifically on the south and western side of the development. To center the road in these locations would require
the removal of the existing roadway sections and Premier Bank would rather not have that additional cost. A
portion of an existing alleyway would be utilized to access lots 1, 2, and 3 in the center of the development. This
alley section would have to be maintained as a private drive. The last change to note with this proposal, is the
elimination of the western most access point to 210` Street, leaving just the one centralized access to 210 Street.
Option 2 shown as Exhibit C, consists of 70 lots and is similar to option 1 in that the lot widths and right -of -way
will be increased as previously described in option 1. The main difference between option 2 and option 1 is that
the alley is entirely removed and driveways for lots 1, 2, and 3 in the center of the development are extended out
to a roadway.
Option 3 shown as Exhibit D, consists of 70 lots and is almost identical to option 2 with the exception of how the
eastern most north/south road would be constructed.
Of the three options, option 1 seems to be the most practical and clean from a road alignment perspective. With that being
said, there are issues that would need to be addressed. Premier Bank would have to work with the owners of the lots 1, 2
and 3 that access off of the alley regarding the maintenance of the alley as the City would not take ownership of the alley.
The last issue that I want to make the Commission aware of is if the roads in this development were to become public
streets as proposed, snow plowing could become an issue as the snow plow operator would be forced to move snow to just
one side of the road as the roadway would not be centered in the right -of -way.
If any of the three options are found to be acceptable and all issues can be resolved, a preliminary and final plat will have
to be applied for and approved by both the Planning Commission and City Council. In addition an amendment to the
Planned Unit Development Agreement would be necessary under any of the three options to address the changes that are
being proposed.
The last item that I would like to touch on are the design standards that were developed with the initial Planned Unit
Development, and whether they are still appropriate of if they should be amended or even removed. The approved design
standards are attached as Exhibit E. Staff is comfortable with amending the design standards to remove the requirement
of multiple floor plans and elevations, however, the remaining portions of the standards at a minimum should remain in
effect.
ACTION REQUESTED
Provide comment on the three options provided.
Respectfully submitted,
Tony Wippler, Assistant City Planner
Cc: Steve Burrows, Premier Bank
Grant Jacobson, Jacobson Engineering
3 NUMBER
DRAWING NUMBER
FaPal:ea FAA, NAB. 555t
DRAWING NUMBER
DRAWIN
0
SfNNAV vIQOuNv3
r se L..,.0 S
Ol
CY z A 107.1.12O y
r
I tD I
I I
L
s I D i I^,
I I
ms`s. L ----J
I m I�
rf'111 x.2,1
I a I
ro
481695 M, 1S,60.005
r fi r
1.I ID I..I 'I I I.I N
E I I 6IIt) 4I
oo.. L J" L 1' L— _1" L—_�
ann my.
8f 794
3 9ff4. ION
ci
;W
O 5
J n
00
j 3.19,60.0 o
O a°
o l
J j
ek,
U
Z
2
oz
0.0
we
N 2
2 ir
mQ
N W
N
ce
O
5
7
Z
0 N
O
V N F5
Q Et
W
W
Z
2
w
fa
a
p fi
EX. g
5a
g
U
z
o
w�
to z
z 3
tow
�a
36,
;a
4
EX.
o z
0
a0
z
Sunrise Ponds PUD Design Standards
Listed below are the building material and design guidelines proposed for the new Sunrise Ponds
PUD. The design standards were developed with the intention of giving the future homeowners a
wide range of home designs to choose from. Implementing the design guidelines below will
permit the new homeowners to take advantage of the PUD zoning and allow them to customize
their homes from the assortment of options.
A) Exterior material guidelines (minimum)
1. Siding: vinyl, shakes, stone, or brick. The front of the structure will be a minimum
of 15% brick or stone. At least 10% of the front will be vinyl shakes. The balance
will be vinyl siding. There will be a large assortment of colors and textures to
choose from.
2. Each elevation shall have projecting architectural features such -as bowed or bay
windows, columns, building offsets, window recesses, or overhangs.
3. Colors: minimum of six siding and shake colors. No two adjacent houses will
have identical front elevations.
4. Roofing: asphalt or fiberglass shingles. Throughout the development, roof lines
will have variations in plane accomplished by dormers, gables, or hipped roofs.
5. Windows: energy- efficient vinyl. Window features may include arches, shutters,
wraps (trim boards), awnings, or flower boxes.
6. Each front elevation and elevations on corner lots that face the street shall have
window wraps.
7. Trim: vinyl, shake, stone, or brick options available.
8. Soffits and fascia: aluminum
9. Foundation: concrete poured walls or block
10. Front porches shall be required on 20% of the homes. They may encroach into
the front yard setback by 5 feet.
B) Detached or attached garages
The choice (detached vs. attached) will be allowed on any of the units. However, both
types of garages will have the same type of siding and soffits and fascia as the associated
houses. Both types of garage roofs shall have similar roof pitches and shingles as the
main house. Any windows, doors and other details should be the same as the main house.
Garage height shall not exceed 20 feet, per the City of Farmington code.
C) Multiple floors plans and elevations
1. A minimum of 10 floor plans shall be required. Reverse floor plans are counted
as different floor plans.
2. Each floor plan shall have a minimum of 2 distinct elevations. No two
neighboring houses will have identical front elevations.
/7)Z /4,/ 1�
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
Attachments:
INTRODUCTION
Planning Division Review
Applicant Property Owner:
Location of Property:
Existing Zoning:
Comprehensive Plan:
Current Land Use:
Proposed Expansion:
DISCUSSION
City of Farmington
430 Third Street
Farmington, Minnesota
651.280.6800 Fax 651.280.6899
www.cifarmington.mn.us
Planning Commission
Tony Wippler, Assistant City Planner
Dakota County Lumber Expansion Sketch Plan Possible Variance 28 8th Street
December 11, 2012
Mr. Steve Finden of Dakota County Lumber Company has submitted the attached sketch plan and building
elevations for a proposed office expansion at his property located at 28 8 Street, Farmington, MN 55024 and
has requested the Planning Commission review and comment on the plans.
Dakota County Lumber Company— Steve Finden
28 8 Street
Farmington, MN 55024
Ex. A Sketch Plan and eastern/front building elevation
Ex. B Remaining building elevations and building section plan
Ex. C Floor Plan
Ex. D Photo of existing building
28 8 Street, Farmington, MN 55024
B -1 (Highway Business)
Commercial
Office and Lumber Yard
2,400 square feet of additional office space
Dakota County Lumber is proposing the construction of an approximately 2,400 square foot addition onto the
southern side of their existing office building located at 28 8 Street.
Sketch Plan Review
The City Code provides for the submittal of a sketch plan prior to the formulation and submittal of a site plan.
The sketch plan has been provided to the Planning Commission for its comments concerning (among other
things) the general site design, setbacks, access, parking and other potential impacts to surrounding properties.
It should be noted that these comments are intended to be advisory in nature and do not constitute a binding
decision on the sketch plan or any other discussion that may take place during this meeting.
Setbacks Lot Coverage
The minimum setback requirements for the B -1 (Highway Business) Zoning District are as follows:
Front yard: 30 feet (the office building is subject to front yard setbacks from both 8 Street and Pine
Street).
Side Yard: 10 feet
Rear Yard: 10 feet
The expansion area, highlighted in yellow on Exhibit A, is proposed to be setback 41 feet from 8 Street and 10
feet from Pine Street. The proposed setback from Pine Street will require a variance of 20 feet be approved by
the Planning Commission. The variance would be heard at a separate meeting through the public hearing
process. The applicant would like the Commission to do a cursory review of the proposed variance to
determine if the Commission would potentially support the variance. If the applicant were to meet the required
setback (30 feet) from Pine Street it would not afford them the room necessary to build the size of addition they
need for their operation. Additionally, constructing an addition to the north side of the existing building would
likely require relocating the main entrance to the property and eliminate the current paved drive isle into the
yard area while also eliminating a portion of paved parking area. Adding on to the east or western sides of the
existing building would eliminate current paved parking areas as well. All other setbacks would be met with
this proposal.
Lot coverage is not an issue with this property. Properties located within a B -1 Zoning District are allowed to
cover up to 25% of a lot with buildings and /or structures. Currently on site there are seven buildings /structures
that cover approximately 7.5% of the lot. With the proposed 2,400 square foot addition, the lot cover will
increase to 8.4 well below the 25% allowed by City Code.
Off-street Parking
Section 10 -6 -4 of the City Code requires that 1 off street parking stall be provided for each 250 square feet of
office space. With the proposed expansion, there will be a total square footage of 4,800 square feet of office
space on site. This would require a total of 19 off street parking stalls be provided. It should be noted that City
Code requires any off street parking area to be paved with concrete or bituminous material. There is substantial
paved area adjacent to the existing office building which appears to be of adequate size to accommodate 19
vehicles, however, this will have to be verified by the applicant.
Building Elevations
The building elevations are shown in Exhibits A and B. The expansion will mirror the exterior of the existing
office building which is shown in Exhibit D.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
The Planning Commission should provide comments on the sketch plan and proposed front yard setback
variance to the applicant.
Respectfully submitted,
Tony \A/tippler, Assistant City Planner
Cc: Steve Finden, Dakota County Lumber
ri0U72115NOJ MLL vnyknO 3WJ5 NOd 3"I49JOdi33
3G dW 510ISN.10 a'W MAP TN.. 14x1 m ovainoYH5 M^1
a 1.1df5' M 34 ANdO?Ih0d51W135341 dO 911SId33E dW
943JWF0 7NW5i3G 3LL 6M N3J6 MI1M0dd3 MO, YNOKSIWO
5soam Od A111055NOZ33 IXJ:Jd33JJ31omact II 3104 wax
NO.LONID%flEV3
JC.LNf1OD VIONVU
SRISY9Z or.171d IIk
S9RS NlY 4 <I^P��21
A "^%wP�H 8R[RZ
E
Z
4
6
Ex A
'fo10 NILLNO1014 3Ph5 ?WAN.
39 CAW SNOKNat OW 5WJ0 11d yJ3OJM1W701N31W)O4K 0Nd
Y3V3K '33VMO 3+1 'AT/317N 3OJ SW, W34 dO 7NWd33'd (INW
ONISJ3tl'ONFGMa'J 3U M 3'fWi N519 Wt .0,44 AmnAa 'L`1OKSIWo ao
5302643O1 UI3915NOd5+3 ON !WON NSIS3Q'11 'alai MOaai
NNi No.LfNITAi2IVd
ussv\ni
JC1.1\Tf1OD VJ,OMVQ
RO[SE9iY0 3/114 Uthydo
59055 MN 4.1.p..11 6eM vouvpvaH RRERZ
E
F
Q Y
7 {i
Q
6
9
EX. I3
'N011=1.1510, MLLN tl 31W580d A19KNOMd
39 aws,so' is JMNI0 aW9 p/13t 1N073D WnW VA7,04 11115
'Y3NdY'dnMO 3LL 'ANd07d21wd ZIP13333U 10 9rMw fd01W
0N'IXJaO'7YIMM5‘1 aVl N WAN N3Aa RM 130dd3 AWA3 'SN055RNO EO
ants.. ksokasNo.ass ON smarts✓ N7253Q 1I '3ION
NILSS NO LONIIni2IVJ
AINfOD VIOXVU
SOIS S9Z LOS :n3/11d
DOSS NW .1
S.M. NC&
Csi
g Q
B
9
C