Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09.08.92 Planning PacketAGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR SEPTEMBER 8, 1992 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. HRA /EDC DIRECTOR'S OFFICE 2. APPROVE MINUTES August 11, 1992 3. DISCUSSIONS a. Pat and Bobbi Devney 4900 203rd Street West Continued Discussion of Playhouse Height b. James and Kimberly Harms 310 Division Street Request to Rezone Lots 7 and 8, Town of Farmington, from R -3 PUD to B -2 c. Very Low Density Housing Option in Draft Comrehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance d. Raising Square Footage for R -1 Low Density District Lots e. Follow Through on Previous Decisions Related to Zoning 4. ADJOURN 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVE MINUTES 3. DISCUSSIONS AGENDA REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR SEPTEMBER 8, 1992 a. Pat and Bobbi Devney 4900 203rd St. West The Devneys have not called to clarify their intention with regard to the height of the playhouse. Neither appear to be at home during the day, but staff will contact them by mail once the Commission provides some direction. b. James and Kimberly Harms 310 Division Street The Drs. Harms have an agreement with the HRA to purchase Lots 7 and 8, Block 18, Town of Farmington to build a new dental clinic. The HRA agreed to this sale based upon developer plans which have indicated that this portion of the site would be used by a professional office for the past two years. The block was rezoned from heavy business to multiple family residential in August of 1989 to accommodate a proposed townhouse development for senior citizens. However, by 1990, the draft comprehensive plan showed the entire block to be commercial in anticipation of an expansion of the business district on the north side of Highway 50. The Harms would like to break ground by the middle of October and have asked if the Commission is willing to schedule a hearing during a special meeting on September 29, 1992. This would allow the City Council to take action on October 5th rather than October 19th. While a schematic site plan is now available, a more detailed plan and building elevations will be available during the public hearing. Recommendation: Set public hearing for September 29, 1992. c. Very Low Density Housing The July 29, 1992 memo to the Development Committee has been recopied for convenience of Commission members. Again, the City Council has requested these changes but is very interested in the Commission's reaction to them. The next step in the process is for an informal review by the staff of the Metropolitan Council. Following that, some time needs to be devoted to locating the areas of the City that will be suitable for this housing option. d. Raising Square Footage for R 1 Low Density District Lots Chairman Hanson has suggested a discussion regarding the possible desirability of increasing lot size requirements within the R -1 District. He has suggested increasing the 10,000 square foot area to 12,000 square feet as a possible companion for the 2i acre lot size proposed in the Residential Agricultural District. The most recent plats approved in Farmington have typical lots ranging between 10,500 square feet and 11,050 square feet. The Sienna proposal will feature lots of 6,000 square feet as a way to reduce housing costs. The timing of such an increase is probably not good since it sends two messages and creates a great disparity between the R -1 and R -2 Districts. It would also introduce another minimum standard within neighborhoods that are just beginning to open. It might be well to fold this discussion into the work the Design Center has agreed to complete and evaluate it on the basis of future annexation /merger with Empire Township. Empire already has a lot size limit of 15,000 square feet and apparently no concern about the size of its MUSA area. e. Follow Through on Previous Decisions Related to Zoning Chairman Hanson has inquired about follow through on issues that the Commission has either acted upon or has been indirectly involved through ordinance requirements. They are as follows: A. James Pluntz 20226 Akin Road On February 11, 1992, the Commission approved a 1000 square foot detached storage building on the condition that the existing detached structure would be removed. The building in question is still on site. B. Clayton and Alice Nielsen 508 First Street On August 20, 1991, the Commission approved a variance whereby the applicant was allowed individual ownership of the two sections of a proposed duplex fronting on Spruce Street, subject to the removal of an existing white house within one year. The house has been removed and a new one is being built to replace it. Questions have been raised about building coverage on both the duplex and the new single family dwelling being built on First Street. When the duplex was built, the maximum 207 building coverage was overlooked by everyone since the regulation on building size had been in place for only 90 days. It appears that the building official also overlooked the building coverage on the single family dwelling since with only minor modification it is the same floor plan as was utilized for each half of the duplex. The maximum land area which may be covered on a 6600 square foot lot is 1320 square feet. The Nielsen house is 1320 square feet but it also has a deck and a garage of 630 square feet bringing the total coverage to approximately 1950 square feet. When the City Council adopted the density standards for building coverage, it increased the amount of coverage within the R -4 District to 30% as recommended by the Planning Commission. This would mean that a 6600 square foot lot could be covered by 1980 square feet of buildings. It might be well for the Commission to look at the structure now being built on First Street and decide if an increase in building coverage within the R -2 District might also be appropriate. One of the main selling points in the Sienna proposal is to make available relatively small lots but not necessarily small housing units. Discussion would be worthwhile in any case since others within the R -2 District would also like to develop existing lots with more intensity. C. Francis Valek 607 Oak Street On April 9, 1991 the Commission agreed the construction of a 990 square foot garage subject to the immediate removal of an 18' x 25' grey building and removal of the 12' x 18' building by April 9, 1992. The 12' x 18' building is still on site. D. Gordon and Twyla Chant 621 Oak Street On October 29, 1990 the Commission approved the construction of an accessory apartment over a garage measuring 26 x 32 feet at this address subject to the removal of the existing attached garage and the off- street parking slab on the lawn in the 7th Street front yard. The attached garage has been removed, but the concrete slab is still on site. E. Jerry Sachs 820 7th Street On June 12, 1990, the Commission approved the moving of a 16 x 22 foot garage subject to the provision of a letter of credit or certified check for $1,500 to be held until the garage is in place and a certificate of insurance covering property damage and personal injury. All listed requirements were fulfilled and the garage was moved. F. Ed Gieseke 28 4th Street The fee owner sold 28 4th Street to Mid America Dairymen for a cheese store which would convert the building from a body shop. On July 29, 1986, the Commission approved a special exception (conditional use) subject to the addition of Class 5 gravel to the proposed parking area and paving of this lot, capable of parking 5 automobiles, by September, 1987. The lot has never been paved. G. Sauber Plumbing! Dakota Lumber Lamperts3 (1) In February of 1989, the zoning ordinance was amended to include landscaping as an element required in developing new uses or adapting existing uses within the City. When Conditional Uses are involved, the staff and Planning Commission have attempted to follow the objectives of the ordinance. When permitted uses have been reviewed, the emphasis on landscaping has been greatly diminished. In one, Sauber Plumbing, landscaping was not a requirement when the existing building was expanded. In June of 1989, when Sauber Plumbing, as a permitted use, received a permit to expand their building at 100 Third Street. The issue of landscaping was not raised. In May of 1992, the plumbing shop received a permit to pave an existing driveway plus an additional five feet in width. Once again, because a conditional use permit was not involved, the site layout was not examined. The result of both actions is that an upgraded use in the B -3 District has no landscaping and a driveway access that has considerably more width than the zoning ordinance allows. (2) In August of 1991, Dakota Lumber was granted a permit to build its new sales office on Highway 3 subject to the installation of a paved parking lot and landscaping that was approved by the staff Development Committee. Currently preparations are being made to pave the parking area but landscaping has not been installed. A second building permit was granted early this year to convert a small building to a large storage building utilizing the setback of the original building. Land- scaping in this project was limited to the requirement of additional lilacs in the Pine Street right of way to fill openings in an existing row of mature lilacs. To date, this has not been accomplished. (3) In May of 1992, Lampert Yards was granted a permit to build a new storage building and to pave the yard area following public hearings for rezoning by the Planning Commission in January and the City Council in February. A permit was granted to build a new storage building subject to a mutually agreed upon landscape plan reviewed by the staff Development Committee. Because Lamperts wished to maximize the use area of land purchased from the HRA, it has provided cash to the HRA to cover the cost of extending an eight foot wide brick walk between Spruce and Oak Streets. Lamperts has also agreed to street trees and sidewalks along its Spruce Street frontage. To date, landscaping has not been provided. The Commission may wish to recommend language that will establish a time frame for all contingencies associated with permitted and conditional uses. This would relate to the removal of structures as well as the completion of landscaping and paving. It is apparent that the landscaping section needs to be reworked enough to make it clear that both permitted and conditional uses require some landscape effort. It may beneficial to direct all landscaping proposals to the staff Development Committee. H. Summary The process of investigating the lack of follow through on the above identified projects came at a time when it was discovered that a significant administrative detail had been missed. Lamperts has negotiated for refinancing some of its debt. The lender needs a letter stating that the Farmington Lamperts is in compliance with all zoning. The record shows that, while the Lamperts' property was rezoned, supply yards are a conditional use in the B -2 General Business District. A conditional use hearing was not held. The City Attorney has said that since a public hearing was held in which everyone owning property within 350 feet was notified and the site plan was discussed, the intent of the ordinance has been satisfied. He did suggest, however, that the Commission should recognize that the expansion of Lamperts supply yard operation is an acceptable conditional use in the B -2 General Business District, based upon the rezoning hearing which took place in January. A motion to that effect would eliminate the need to advertise an after the fact hearing and the staff could then supply Lamperts with a letter stating that the yard at 109 Spruce Street is in compliance with applicable zoning regulations. eta.. ef AL. Charles Tooker City Planner cc: file