Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-14-20 Planning Commission Minutes Regular Meeting January 14,2020 1. Call to Order Chair Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Rotty, Franceschelli, Lehto, Tesky, Windschitl Members Absent: Also Present: Tony Wippler, Planning Manager 2. Approval of Minutes a. MOTON by Franceschelli, second by Tesky to approve the minutes of December 10, 2019. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 3. Public Hearings—Chair Rotty opened the public hearings a. Amendment to a Conditional Use Permit Allowing a Church in the B-2 Zoning District The applicant is Christian Family Church and the property owner is Paul Otten. The location is 400 Third Street. Churches are allowed in this zoning district. They would like to occupy the northern portion of the building. Parking is available on Third and Oak Streets and in the Second Street parking lot. The congregation has 25 people. Services would be held on Sunday mornings. Contingencies include: 1. The applicant obtain all necessary building permits for conversion of space to a church. 2. A sign permit shall be required for any signage to be placed on site. Member Franceschelli noted there is another church across the street, so during services, parking may be an issue. He welcomed them to the community. Member Tesky noted the same comments regarding parking, but it is a nice element to add to downtown on a Sunday morning. Member Lehto agreed with the previous comments and asked if they had plans for growth. The applicant stated their intention is to gradually grow over time, but at the same time there is practical limitations of the space as it is relatively small. This space would be a stepping stone to bigger things as time goes on. Chair Rotty asked how many parishioners it would take for them to outgrow this space. The applicant stated about 75 to 100 people, although you could do two services on Sunday morning. Chair Rotty noted they were looking at this as a temporary space. The applicant stated they do have a long-term lease for several years. Chair Rotty recalled when this was discussed in 2008 for a different church,they were encouraged to use the Second Street parking lot. He realized not everyone would want to use that, but there may be other businesses operating during that time and encouraged the church to make use of the Second Street parking lot. He asked about hours of operation and days of the week. The applicant stated the primary service would be Sunday morning 10:00 to 12:00. There would be a Wednesday night bible study. Chair Rotty commented that Planning Commission Meeting January 14,2020 Page 2 having too many churches in the downtown will take away space for businesses,but the church is leasing this space, so the property is still taxable. He welcomed them to Farmington. MOTION by Tesky, second by Lehto to close the public hearing. APIF MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Franceschelli, second by Windschitl to approve the Conditional Use Permit with the contingencies. APIF,MOTION CARRIED. 4. Discussion a. Sapphire Lake 2nd Addition Final Plat The final plat consists of 33 single family lots. There are two outlots for storm water basins and future development. The city is requiring that the entire storm water basin be separated out from Outot B into its own outlot and then deeded to the city. The plat shows 213th Street W extending to the east and terminates within the Pt Addition. Spruce Street on the south end will extend across the Prairie Waterway and into the 2nd Addition. Both 213th Street and Spruce Street will have temporary cul-de-sacs constructed at the eastern boundaries of the 2nd Addition. Five-foot wide sidewalks will be on the north sides of 213th Street W and Spruce Street and on the west side of 15th Street. An eight- foot wide bituminous trail will be provided along the south side of Spruce Street from 14th Street in East Farmington to where Spruce Street will intersect 15th Street in this final plat. A future trail will connect from this location and go behind the lots within Block 5 and continue northeast to Biscayne Avenue. Contingencies include: 1. Satisfaction of all engineering comments dated December 30, 2019. 2. Execution of a Development Contract. 3. Temporary easements must be provided to the city to cover any public drainage that will occur around the temporary cul-de-sacs that will be constructed on 213th Street W and Spruce Street. The developer stated there are four homes being built in the first addition for model homes. This is the next phase of the Sapphire Lake development. They are grading the site for the 2nd Addition and as they move to the 3rd Addition they will finish the entire pond and will have two more additions after the 2nd Addition. Member Franceschelli asked about off-street parking for the residents or is it street parking? The developer stated each house will have a driveway and a three-car garage. They do have the ability to park on the public street. Member Franceschelli was thinking about fire and police emergency access as 32 feet can get narrow. Chair Rotty asked about timing for the 2nd Addition. The developer stated they will bid it out in the next couple weeks. He estimated they will start construction mid-June, as construction in the first phase started last fall. Chair Rotty asked about access for trucks and equipment. The developer stated they will come down 213th Street from the west. Chair Rotty noted they are coming through an existing development so asked they be a good neighbor and stay on top of noise and cleaning up. The other phases would be in 2021 and 2022. Chair Rotty asked if the trail to the northeast will connect with anything in the future. The developer stated it will terminate at the east end of the plat and there is parkland beyond that. Planning Commission Meeting January 14,2020 Page 3 MOTION by Lehto, second by Tesky to approve the Sapphire Lake 2nd Addition Final Plat with the contingencies. APIF,MOTION CARRIED. b. Certificate of Appropriateness Request for Exterior Work—345 3rd Street (Fletcher Building)—continued from October 22,2019 Staff has consulted with Robert Vogel of Pathfinder CRM LLC,to produce a Condition of Historic Property Report and to provide findings and recommendations for rehabilitating the exterior walls of the Fletcher Building at 345 Third Street. Mr. Vogel stated in his report the brick walls are a distinguishing design feature and contribute significantly to the Fletcher building's historical and architectural values. The owner proposed to cover the north and east sides of the building with stucco as the bricks are starting to crumble and fall. Covering historic brick walls with stucco is not an appropriate treatment. He did recommend: 1. Clean the exterior walls. 2. Repoint(tuckpoint)the deteriorated mortar joints. 3. Repair/replace damaged or missing bricks. 4. Remove the old paint. 5. Repaint exterior walls. 6. Conduct routine inspection and maintenance of the building exterior. Based on Mr. Vogel's report, staff recommends denial of the Certificate of Appropriateness. The MN Historical Society's website provides a list of products and services of companies and individuals that have experience in preserving, rehabilitating, or evaluating historic properties. If the Planning Commission elects to deny the request,they should make the applicant aware of their right to appeal this decision via Section G of 2-11-5 of the city code. Member Franceschelli was glad they reached out to Mr. Vogel. He cannot support the applicant's desire to put stucco on the walls. The structure needs a thorough drying out and stucco will create a larger problem. The owner has options that have not been explored yet and the EDA has new funds she may be able to use. The MN Historical Society also has grants available. Member Tesky agreed the owner needs to investigate more and will deny the request. Member Lehto also agreed. She asked if additional comment has been received from the property owner. No comments have been received. Member Lehto asked if the owner has considered doing emergency work to the roof to try to remediate some of the water damage. Then the building could dry out. Staff noted the roof was replaced a couple years ago by using grant funds. But no other work has been done. Member Windschitl agreed with Mr. Vogel. Now it is up to the owner to decide what she wants to do. Chair Rotty stated this is a unique situation. When she purchased the building, it was a Heritage Landmark and falls under a different set of rules. What she is planning to do will affect the appearance of the building. He feels stuck between wanting to help the applicant and not going against what the experts are recommending. He will support Planning Commission Meeting January 14,2020 Page 4 denying the certificate, but he wanted to vent his frustration. This is a unique, awkward situation he wouldn't wish upon anyone. We do have to let the applicant know she can appeal the denial to the City Council within ten days. There is also a process for her to petition to get out of being a Heritage Landmark. The applicant is aware of that. Councilmember Donnelly was in attendance. He related to Chair Rotty's comments and feels bad for all parties. As a city and staff we want to be pro-business and have small businesses. This is a big burden on a small business. It is a historic building. It is a balance between being pro-business and helping out a long-time business owner and preserving the historic character of downtown. It seems like an undue burden. The owner was probably not aware of the restrictions of the building when purchased. He was torn and sided with the property owner. He would hate to see that building go empty because of requiring the special brick necessary to fix it. Member Franceschelli stated the Planning Commission has no funds. The EDA has a facade grant program and this is a new budget cycle for them. If the owner made a positive presentation, can the EDA award all it's funds this year to that one project or is it obligated to spread it out in smaller increments throughout the community. Staff stated there are funding limits to $10,000 maximum. It is meant for smaller projects to be spread out. The EDA could review the application,but it is up to them to determine. Member Franceschelli asked if there is anything else in the city that can be utilized. Staff did not believe so. Member Windschitl asked if the building owner can apply every year to get funds. Staff stated they can apply once a year. Chair Rotty stated his discussion was not to sway the commission, because he understands the limitations we have in dealing with ordinances. He just wanted to voice his frustration with the process. MOTION by Franceschelli, second by Lehto to deny the request for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the Fletcher building. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. c. 2020 Meeting Calendar Staff provided the 2020 meeting calendar. There are date adjustments in August and September. 5. Adjourn MOTION by Franceschelli second by Tesky to adjourn at 7:45 p.m. APIF,MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, Cjwt111,a Mul,Ler Cynthia Muller Administrative Assistant