Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02.13.90 Planning Packet1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. 2. APPROVE MINUTES JANUARY 9, 1990 3. DISCUSSION AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR FEBRUARY 13, 1990 Wallace Berglund Request to Sell 3 acres to FEI, Inc. on Highway 50 4. PUBLIC HEARING 7:20 P.M. LLM /RLP Partnership Conditional Use Request to Add to the Bar of the Bowling Alley at 27 5th Street 5. DISCUSSION Request from Gordon and Twylla Chant to Discuss Potential of Building an Accessory Apartment within R -2 District at 621 Oak Street 6. DISCUSSION Request from City Council to Re- evaluate R -3 Zoning in Fair Hills Addition 7. DISCUSSION Comprehensive Plan Goal &Objectives and Policies 8. ADJOURN AGENDA REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR FEBRUARY 13, 1990 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. 2. APPROVE MINUTES JANUARY 9, 1990 3. DISCUSSION WALLACE BERGLUND REQUEST TO SELL 3 ACRES TO FEI, INC. ON HWY 50 Mr. Berglund has requested staff to approve a waiver of platting in order for FEI, Inc. to expand in the direction of Duo Plastics leaving an opening on Highway 50 wide enough for road construction to serve the property without frontage. At the time that FEI Inc. purchased property for the original building in June of 1982, the Planning Commission approved the subdivision waiver on the condition that two sixty foot (60') wide access roads shall be left to pro- vide space for the north /south relocation of County 31 and a road to provide access to the industrial land behind Duo Plastics and that no further subdivision waivers are granted unless the property at the rear is platted. This was approved on a 3 to 1 vote with one member absent. The City Council voted to override the Planning Commission's recommendation on the access for the relocation of County 31 and the FEI Inc. structure was built without such a right of way. This request is a classic example of a developer attempting to take maximum pro- fit from development without putting anything into it. In order for such an expansion to take place, the only reasonable approach would be for Mr. Berglund to create a one lot subdivision with an improved street separating FEI, Inc. from Duo Plastics. This will assure that any development taking place to the north will have at least one access road from Highway 50. The City has several examples of property divisions, and at least one plat, where street rights of way have been designated adjoining undeveloped land without any improvements. This creates substantial penalties for later development since there is no benefit that may be assessed against adjoining property until the road or street reaches the rear property line. Recommendation The staff recommends against a further subdivision waiver as it provides an immediate shortcut which may benefit two parties but at the expense of the entire City when long term economic development is considered. Two reasonable alternatives for Mr. Berglund are for him to either create a one lot subdivision with an improved street along its east side or to write a long term lease of a portion of this property to FEI, Inc. 4. PUBLIC HEARING 7:20 P.M. LLM /RLP PARTNERSHIP CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST The original conditional use to transfer an existing bowling alley to a vacant office building in the I -1 Light Industrial District was granted in August of 1980. This was made possible by amending the zoning ordinance to include commercial recreation in this district as a conditional use. The present owners believe that an expanded bar area will be good for their business since people do not stay on the premises to drink when the bar area becomes overcrowded. Since the original conditional use was granted, the City has enacted a land- scaping section which emphasizes shade for parking areas and grass in all areas not paved. The applicant has said that all of the lot not covered by building is paved. The staff believes that once the ordinance was changed to require landscaping, all new and changing uses should follow the requirements. Toward that end, the staff would be willing to develop a parking plan with landscaping pockets with suggested planting types which could be turned over to a nursery for a complete landscape plan. Recommendation Table the request until a landscaping plan can be presented to the Commission for final approval. 5. DISCUSSION REQUEST FROM GORDON AND TWYLLA CHANT TO DISCUSS ACCESSORY APARTMENT This property is located at the northwest quarter of the intersection of Oak and Seventh Street. The request is from a couple with a signed purchase agree- ment who wish to know if, while they are building a two car garage, can also build an upper level accessory apartment which will be rented until they need the space in the future for aging parents. The property is being purchased because of its character, and the new owners wish to pursue the options available for enrollment of it on the National Historic Register. The garage envisioned therefore will be in character with the style of the existing structure. The definition of an accessory apartment states as follows: "A dwelling unit which is subordinate to a permitted principal one family residence in terms of size, location and appearance and located on the same lot therewith." The lot measures 100'x120' and would qualify for construction of a full sized duplex. Recommendation Indicate the need for complete drawings of the proposed improvements after checking with staff for various applicable requirements if the Commission is comfortable with the proposal described herein. A hearing would be scheduled later. 6. DISCUSSION REQUEST FROM CITY COUNCIL TO RE- EVALUATE ZONING IN FAIR HILLS The attached memo from Administrator Thompson outlines this request. The area in question was rezoned R -3 when Fair Hills was first developed. Other portions of the plat were also zoned R -3 at that time, but market considerations convinced the developer that R -1 Zoning was more appropriate at this time and in this place. Currently there are no development proposals for the site in question and, with the exception of the high density areas in the Dakota County Estates PUD, it is the only R -3 Zoning outside of the traditional central area of Farmington. The City Attorney has advised that in Minnesota, the act of zoning does not confer any right on property when no action has been taken by the landowner to make improvements consistent with that zoning. It should be noted also that while the property has been zoned R -3 for many years, the Farmington Comprehensive Plan has never recognized this outlot as a high density area. The City Attorney has also stated that even if Planning Commission mem- bers are located within the vicinity of a proposed down zoning, they can vote on the issue without any question of propriety since the Commission only recommends a course of action to the City Council. Recommendation Consider all factors and reach a conclusion consistent with good planning practice. The staff does not believe that a market exists for multiple family housing in this neighborhood at the present time. 7. DISCUSSION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOALS AND OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES Attached are copies for general discussion and consideration. Action is not recommended immediately. Charles Tooker Planner