HomeMy WebLinkAbout12.08.92 Planning PacketAGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR
DECEMBER 8, 1992
1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M.
2. APPROVE MINUTES November 10, 1992 Regular Meeting
3. PUBLIC HEARINGS
7:00 P.M. Request from Farmington Parks and Recreation Department for a
Conditional Use to Build an Information Kiosk at the Kuchera
Entrance to. Rambling River Park
7:00 P.M. Continued Hearing Based Upon the Request from Elm Park Limited,
Inc., to Build a 45 Unit Apartment Building on the South Half
of Block 17, Northeast of the Intersection of First and Oak Streets
4. DISCUSSIONS
Bongard Conditional Use Continued Deliberations on the Request from Craig
Bongard to Rebuild an Equipment Maintenance and
Storage Building East of County Road 31
TO Development and Excavating, Inc. Continued Deliberations on the Request
from James and Therese Reisinger to Install
an Equipment Maintenance and Storage Use on
C -1 Conservation Land East of County Road 31
Request from Steve Finden Request for the Commission to Explore Rezoning the West
Side of Highway 3 Between Willow and Pine Streets from
I -1 to B -1
Very Low Density Housing
City Design Standards
5. ADJOURN
Implementing Standards in Certain of the Existing
Agricultural Districts
Draft Developed by the Staff for Consideration by the
Planning Commission and City Council
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. APPROVE MINUTES
AGENDA REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR
DECEMBER 8, 1992
3. PUBLIC HEARINGS
7:00 P.M. Request from Farmington Parks and Recreation Department for a Conditional
Use to Build an Information Kiosk at the Kuchera Entrance to Rambling
River Park
The attached topographical map indicates the proposed location for the kiosk adjoining
the path leading to the bridge over the Vermillion River. The kiosk is an open
12' x 12' structure which is situated 110 feet from the street, well behind the
existing building setback in this block and approximately 60 feet from the bridge.
Because the pathway is 75 feet from the east property line, the building will be
approximately 60 feet from this same property line. The location selected for the
kiosk adjoins the floodway, but actually is located within the R -2 Medium Density
District. Public parks and playgrounds are listed permitted uses, whereas public
buildings are conditional uses. The purpose of the structure is to provide a covered
area where people may stand while reading the information provided within.
Recommendation
Approve the information kiosk as requested by the Parks and Recreation Department.
7:00 P.M. Continued Hearing Based Upon the Request from Elm Park Limited, Inc.
to Build a 45 Unit Apartment Building on the South Half of Block 17,
Northeast of the Intersection of First and Oak Streets
The reason for continuing the hearing was that a landscape plan had not been submitted
for the Commission to evaluate. Following the meeting, it was discovered that the.
HRA had mixed feelings about the proposal which were not entirely resolved. The
HRA will be meeting on December 2nd to revisit many issues with regard to the proposal.
This analysis is based upon the proposal which arrived in the office on December 1st
and assumes that it follows the direction given by the HRA. It can be said right away
that the landscape plan is by far the most detailed and thoughtful plan submitted
in conjunction with any conditional use application. There are some minor details
that staff has questioned. For example, the additional paving adjoining the pedestrian
way adjoining the east side of the property appears to be unnecessary until it is
recognized that there will be two way traffic on the north /south portion of that
alley. Staff has recommended two additional sugar maple trees for the boulevard
on Oak Street and the note referring to sod on all turf areas should be augmented
to specify the limits of that turf. It would also be important for the bedding
areas under certain of the shrub plantings to identify a ground cover other than
grass.
The zoning issue involved two questions. First, does the Developer plan to proceed
with the plan if the Zoning Ordinance is amended? That question should be solved
by the time of the meeting. If the HRA grants approval to this project on December 2nd,
the project will proceed and can only be accomplished if the requested two lots
are rezoned. The second question involves the future of the lots to the south which
are in the long range expansion program of Lamperts. A suggestion was made to rezone
Planning Agenda Report Page 2
the property now rather than wait for the Lampert proposal. Because of the zoning
history of these blocks, it probably would be more desirable to wait until a specific
proposal has been prepared for the site. Unlike the Elm Park proposal, there is
no land which separates these lots from other B -2 zoning.
The variances requested in this proposal again involve parking, density of units,
setback from First Street and the width of curb cuts. The parking variance request
essentially is one half of a space per unit. The enclosed plan shows 69 spaces,
22 of which are on the Oak Street right of way. Two reasons for granting the variance
are that Oak Street will have no other purpose than to provide access to this apartment
building once Lampert expands, and that the marketing of the units is focused upon
the age group of 55 and older, where typically there are fewer automobiles per unit
than found among the general public.
The density variance as indicated in the earlier analysis is for 6 units based upon
the use of Oak Street in calculating land area. The reason for granting this variance
is that the Planning Commission has long recognized the great disparity between
elderly and handicapped housing densities and regular market rate housing in the
Zoning Ordinance. This should be remedied as it is difficult to justify the difference
of 40 units per acre which now exists in the ordinance. The setback from First
Street can be justified when looking at the site plan provided. The two housing
units to the north on First Street are already on the right of way line rather than
setback 10 feet as suggested last month. The width of curb cuts has been eliminated
as a variance since the site plan now shows parallel parking on Oak Street. Therefore,
three variances are being requested and can be justified.
The last barrier to approval of the conditional use has now been satisfied. The
landscape plan as submitted will provide a reassuring setting for this apartment
building.
Recommendation
Approve the conditional use for a 45 unit apartment building with the three variances
noted and recommend rezoning of Lots 8 and 9, Block 17 from R -2 to B -2 to the City
Council.
4. DISCUSSION Bongard Conditional Use
The attached letter from James Bates raised enough questions about this process
for the staff to again check with the City Attorney for direction prior to developing
the Agenda Report. Mr. Harmeyer will forward his analysis of the status of the
existing conditional use directly to the Commission. Whatever that opinion is,
there are other questions about the Bongard request which the Commission must address.
The primary issue involves the use of crushed concrete as a substitute for a bituminous
parking lot. Preliminary investigation by the City Engineer suggests that crushed
concrete is not a suitable substitute for a bituminous surface primarily because
of the dust. He will prepare a final report to the City Council for their December 7th
meeting, at which time they can decide to proceed with developing amending language
regarding paving for parking lots or not. This should clarify the conditions with
respect to paving that the Planning Commission will place on the Bongard site when
authorizing the issuance of a building permit. In addition, the applicant needs
to clarify where the bituminous material ends and the crushed concrete begins. Staff
would also recommend a more efficient parking arrangement adjoining the office building
which would decrease the amount of paving and increase the plantings adjoining the
building. The entire planting plan will need to be detailed, if the permit is issued,
by showing the plant materials involved and specifying the species of evergreens
that will be planted along the Akin Road side of the existing gravel surface parking
lot. Additional evergreen plantings are recommended both to the north and to the
Planning Agenda Report Page 3
south of the gravel area.
The Commission may also wish to limit the future growth of this conditional use
since it has grown from a five truck to a fifteen truck operation. In addition,
the approved location for parking vehicles which are left running overnight should
be either 300 feet from Akin Road or 100 feet from the southeast corner of the proposed
shop. Another question which needs to be evaluated is that the building will be
substantially expanded to provide office space for the business. This in itself
goes to the original question of the status of this conditional use. The office
addition would not be possible under the terms of the first conditional use.
One final point is that the City Engineer has asked for a grading plan of the site
and basic utility plans including the location of the on -site septic system and
connections to City water. The septic system is important if the site is to be
substantially paved. The system will not work if covered with asphalt. City water
is also important since there is a main on Akin Road within easy reach of the building.
A basic condition of this conditional use shall be connection to the City water
system.
Recommendation
Address the conditional use issue as advised by Dave Harmeyer, the City Council
with regard to paving, the City Engineer with regard to a grading plan and utilities,
and the City Planner's comments on the site and landscape plan.
5. DISCUSSION T &J Development and Excavating, Inc. Request to Install and Equipment
Maintenance and Storage Use on C -1 Conservation Land
The issues in this request are different from the previous request since no conditional
use permit has been issued for the site. The driveway was built to provide access
to the agricultural land to the east. There are no physical improvements to the
property other than the filled area which will be used to park the heavy equipment.
Another difference is that the proposed use will expand business use along Akin
Road at the edge of a residential neighborhood. The question of the moment is whether
or not the Commission would expand this business use in conflict with the City Compre-
hensive Plan.
Of the six criteria listed for approval of a conditional use, the proposal submitted
meets half of them. The proposed use does not preserve the objectives of the Zoning
Ordinance and is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. It does not produce
a visual impression and environment consistent with the neighborhood and the four
6 foot pine trees and six foot berm will not produce a harmonious relationship of
grounds to adjacent properties unless the number of trees are substantially increased.
On the other hand, if the Commission believes that the adjoining use has already
interfered with the residential qualities of the neighborhood sufficiently to grant
a new conditional use, the applicant will need to meet the paving requirements of
the code unless the Council authorizes drafting a revision to the ordinance with
respect to paving.
Questions raised during the public input on November 10, 1992 included the relationship
between this request and the trial which was scheduled to begin on November 17,
1992. The City Attorney has said that there is no relationship between the two,
other than if the request is granted, there is probably little need to proceed with
the trial. Because of illness, the trial date was postponed until January 12, 1992.
As stated in the agenda report for the November 10, 1992 meeting, "The central issue
with this request is that, if granted, it will expand a commercial /industrial use
Planning Agenda Report Page 4
that is not recognized in the Comprehensive Plan on a neighborhood collection street
at the edge of a growing residential area."
Recommendation
Deny the request based upon its long range negative impact on the neighborhood.
7. DISCUSSION Request From Steve Finden for Rezoning West Side of Highway 3 Between
Willow and Pine Streets from I -1 to B-1.
One of the issues being discussed by the Design Center is the future design and
use of Trunk Highway 3. By mid December, Bill Morrish plans to hold the last of
the three Steering Committee meetings at which recommendations will be made. As
you remember, the Design Center staff suggested the need for four moving lanes of
traffic and two frontage roads is probably overkill based upon the amount of traffic
that this road carries, particularly when it is merely a two lane facility both
to the north and south of Farmington. If the road were to be more narrow and without
frontage roads, the possibility of a retail strip raises more questions.
In essence, the Comprehensive Plan has suggested that retail uses should be encouraged
to locate within existing centers either downtown or in Townsedge and only at such
other locations as would create activity nodes. This concept has worked well over
the past 20 years in that the Farmington portion of Highway 3 frontage is remarkably
clear of strip commercial uses. This has broken down substantially within the townships
where business strips and mixed uses are the traveling public's introduction to
Farmington. Across the street from this request is business in both directions.
North of the site is a B -1 Highway Business District which was established by the
City. To the south is a legal nonconforming use which has stood vacant for a year
and, therefore, now categorized as an obsolete building. Once the Design Center
Report has been issued and absorbed by various policy makers, it probably would
make some sense for the Commission to initiate a Highway 3 Land Use Study in connection
with the HRA to provide some overview of the questions raised by this request.
8. DISCUSSION Implementing Very Low Density Housing Standards in Certain Agricultural
Districts.
The attached map and accompanying explanation were developed to show how the very
low density housing concept can be implemented without using up the development
rights of other individuals. If you look carefully, the land area utilized for
this analysis is in the most southwesterly corner of Farmington. The zoning map
may be helpful in understanding the flood plain limits which are very light on this
print. Please keep your copy of the map as long as you need it, but at some time
be prepared to turn it in so that the Council can reuse them.
9. DISCUSSION City Design Standards
Draft sent earlier in previous agenda package.
44,
Charles Tooker
City Planner