HomeMy WebLinkAbout9/10/08
City of Farmington
430 Third Street
.Farmington, MN 55024
A Proud Past - A Promising Future
Committed to Providing High Quality,
Timely and Responsive Service to All
Of Our Customers
AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 10, 2008
7:00 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
a) August 12, 2008 Regular Meeting Minutes
3. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a) Variance for a setback and size of a non-conforming accessory structure.
Applicant: Phyllis Kelly B: Dan Simon
18 Pine Street
Farmington, MN 55024
".
~li\
.
b) Text Amendment to Section 10-5-21 (c) 2 concerning the allowance of a commerdal/recreational
use as a conditional use in the Industrial Park District.
Applicant: City of Farmington
430 Third Street
Farmington, MN 55024
c) Text Amendment to Section 10-2-1 concerning definitions and Section 10-6-14 concerning the
allowance of cell towers in the Park/Open Space District.
Applicant: City of Farmington
430 Third Street
Farmington, MN 55024
d) Text Amendment to Section 10-6-4 (M) concerning parking in residential areas.
Applicant: City of Farmington
430 Third Street
Farmington, MN 55024
4. DISCUSSION
a) Accessory Structures - detached garages versus storage sheds
b) Findings of Fact - Denial of POR-MKR Real Estate CUP Amendment
.5.
ADJOURN
.
.
.
City of Farmington
430 Third Street
Farmington, Minnesota
651.463.7111 . Fax 651.463.2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO:
Planning Commission
Lee Smick, AICP ,0 Q/
City Planner /6~
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Variance for the size and setback of a non-conforming accessory structure.
Applicant: Phyllis Kelly & Dan Simon
18 Pine Street
Farmington, MN 55024
DATE:
September 10, 2008
INTRODUCTION
The applicants, Phyllis Kelly & Dan Simon, are seeking a variance (Exhibit A) from Section 10-
5-6 (B) sub. 2 of the City Code for the size and setback of a non-conforming accessory structure
in the R-1 zoning district. The variance request is to allow 100 square feet over the 1,340 square
feet for a non-conforming accessory structure and setbacks from the side yard of 3 feet and from
the rear yard ofless that I foot in the R-1 zone.
DISCUSSION
The zoning code from Section 10-5-6 (B) sub. 2 is as follows (Ex. B):
2. Accessory Structure Standards:
Maximum size of detached garage is 1,000 square feet
. Applicant currently has non-conforming accessory structure of 1,340 square feet.
Side yard setback 6 feet
. Applicant currently has a 2 foot side yard setback.
Rear yard setback 6 feet
. Applicant currently has a less than 1 foot rear yard setback.
.
.
.
The applicants would like to remove the existing 380 square foot building (corn crib) (Ex. B)
west of the existing 960 square foot building (detached garage) (Ex. C) and construct a 480
square foot building in place of the corn crib. The applicants will attach the new 480 square foot
building to the existing garage and locate it 3 feet from the westerly property line rather than the
existing 2 feet from the property line. The applicants will also construct the new 480 square foot
building with the same ridge line and width as the existing garage, making a total structure size
of 1,440 square feet. The existing setback of less than 1 foot along the north side of the building
will remain (Ex. D).
The City Code provides the following criteria that must be met for a variance to be approved:
1. Because the particular physical surroundings, or the shape, configuration, topography,
or other conditions of the specific parcel of land involved, strict adherence to the
regulations of this Title would cause undue hardship. Economic consideration alone
shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under
the terms of this Title.
The existing corn crib and detached garage were built in the 1940 'so The applicants
would like to utilize approximately the same storage area they have with the existing
corn crib (380 s./) while also building the new structure to the width of the existing
detached garage in order to construct the same ridge line as the detached garage
(480 sf).
2. The conditions upon which a variance is based are unique to the parcel of land for
which the variance is sought and are not applicable, generally, to other properties
within the same zoning classification.
Both existing buildings were constructed in the 1940's and have a total of 1,340
square feet of storage space for the occupants of the property. However, the
applicant's would like to increase that total size to 1,440 square feet by adding an
additional 100 square feet in order to match the width and ridge line of the existing
detached garage. The applicants are also proposing to increase the setback on the
west side by 1 foot. Additionally, the existing corn crib is considered unsafe.
3. The alleged difficulty or hardship is caused by this Title and has not been created by
any persons presently having an interest in the parcel of land.
The hardship has not been created by the applicant since the structure is considered
unsafe and the applicant does not want to lose the storage space that is provided by
the corn crib.
4. The granting of the variance will not alter the essential character of the locality or be
injurious to other property in the vicinity in which the parcel of land is located or
substantially diminish property values.
The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality or be injurious to
other property in the vicinity.
.
.
.
5. The proposed variance will not substantially increase the congestion of the public
streets, or increase the danger of fire, or be detrimental to the public welfare or public
safety.
The variance would not create any of the above-mentioned adverse effects.
6. The requested variance is the minimum action required to eliminate the hardship.
The variance to allow an additional 100 square feet of storage space where the corn
crib has stood for over 67 years and to provide the same ridge line as the existing
detached garage is the minimum action required in order to eliminate the hardship.
Because the property at 18 Pine Street is a metes and bounds lot, it may be prudent for the
Planning Commission to require a survey at least at the rear lot line to ensure that the existing
and proposed structure are located fully on the applicant's property.
ACTION REQUESTED
Approve the variance request to allow 100 square feet over the 1,340 square feet for a non-
conforming accessory structure and setbacks from the side yard of 3 feet and from the rear yard
ofless that 1 foot in the R-l zone and require a survey if necessary.
Respectfully submitted,
~~
Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
cc: Ms. Phyllis Kelly
Mr. Dan Simon
C~.A
.
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463,7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.fanninlrton.mn.us
II
II V ARTANCE APPLTCA TTON
'yl
Applicant:' " .'''S ,J J .-l'l ",I ,SitrOhTelephone: ~ i1l'-?;/8St4
I /"",:", '::{:!:< I
Address: ; n c CJ( ,Lv. f-/dp-(hlnff-/Ofl rfJfI I
City State
Fax: <--J
5~t/
Zip Code
Owner:
Telephone: ({/A) 413 '-3 '6 b (I
Premises Involved:
;t;iJl
City
<01-
j' ,
State
.
Address:
Current Zoning District
Signature of Property Owner
Date
Request Submitted to the Planning Commission on
Public Hearing Set for:
For office use only
Advertised in Local Newspaper:
PlanniDg Corninissioll Action:
_Approved
Denied
-
Comments: '
.
Conditions Set:
Planning division:
Date;
9106
.
.
~
~~
~ 'J
~~
~~
f-
to
-;::
--
...J
t-
V1
l.L1.
'3
6X.8
.
.
.
Ex. ~
6<: Pt!1J;ClltflJ &/
c-;. ~'olW tRIlSl
.
.
.
L4
::z -
"-
'\ ~
--.-l '<
-L
-+
d
()
"2
.,~-
~.])
~
~ ~
~
~
\f) ~
~ ~
'1 \tr
~
~
I
: ~ ~~
I C'( I ~~
I ~~ ~~
I ~ ~ ~ ~
I ~ ~ ~ Q(
'l: ~ I~
I ~~ EL
..a ~ I .c5
~~ cJ
\
,---+ -
.0
~"~
~
:z:
-.J
tn
~
-:5
rllB
i-'
o --"
\
\
r={J~ ; )
I )
0. ~ II t RilE ____-~~=--~
'-, II 1\ _---------------- --- _-----------------------
;/ ---\--.- - ---
l' ---- _.- -------------- -~-- --------------
_-- -.-.- 0\ __.._--...~..~--
, ""~ ,- 1J~---------
~ \ -I/./" ------ ---
-.>- 8 '35------_------
----- .....------
-----
,,/
..----
..--
..---
/,/~
SITE MAP
PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 14-03100-011-27
FeER: PHYLLIS KELLY
18 PINE ST W
FARMINGTON MN 55024-1002
2007 ESTIMATED MARKET VALUES (PAYABLE 2008)
LAND,
BUILDING:
TOTAL:
SCHOOL DISTRICT:
55,600
170,100
225,700
192
LOT SIZE (EXCLUDES
ROAD EASEMENTS)
33,175 sa FT
0,76 ACRES
PROPERTY ADDRESS: 18 PINE ST
FARMINGTON MN 55024
LOCATION:
NW1I4 NW1I4 SECTION 31-114-19
PAYABLE 2007 TAXES
PAYABLE 2008 HOMESTEAD STATUS: FULL HOMESTEAD
NET TAX:
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS:
TOTAL TAX & SA:
2,594.82
0.00
2,594.82
WATERSHED DISTRICT: VERMILLION RIVER
PAYABLE 2008 ASMNT USAGE:RESIDENTIAL
LAST aUALlFIED SALE:
DATE: AMOUNT:
i-'
W
....
;;;; c:...HOO L-
pi5//?JC/
PI&PE;!:-Pj
4
E'I N
5/1E/J5
o
No.ensions rounded to nearest foot.
2007 BUILDING INFORMATION (PAYABLE 2008):
TYPE S.FAM.RES
YEAR BUILT 1910
ARCH/STYLE TWO STORY
FOUNDATION sa FT 988
FINISHED sa FT 1948
BEDROOMS 3
BATHS 1.5
FRAME WOOD
GARAGE sa FT 624
OTHER GARAGE
MISC BLDG
1=..~
~----]
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
\
\
(
[
l
us
I
/
I
\,
8
PLAT NAME: SECTION 31 TWN 114 RANGE 19
TAX DESCRIPTION: PT OF NW 114 OF NW 1/4 COM
N RIW RR 760.54 FT E OF W
LINE N 39D 34M E 91,09 FT
NE ON CUR 192.28 FT N 78D
24M E TANG TO CUR 77.10 FT
TO BEG CONT N 78D 24M E
143.35 FT N PARR ELINE
226.7 FT L 90D 140 FT S
PARR ELINE 257.5 FT TO BEG
3111419
N
~
Copyright 2008, Dakota County -
This drawing is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one.
This drawing is a compilation of records, information and data located in various city, county, and
state offices and other sources, affecting the area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes
only. Dakota County is not responsibie for any inaccuracies herein contained. If discrepancies are
found, please contact Dakota County Survey and Land Information Department.
Map Date: August 18, 2008
Parcels Updated: 5/31/2007 Aerial Photography: 2003
.
City of Farmington
430 Third Street
Farmington, Minnesota
651.463.7111 . Fax 651.463.2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO:
Planning Commission
FROM:
Lee Smick, AICP ,10/
City Planner - ~
SUBJECT:
Text Amendment to Section 10-5-21 (c) 2 concerning the allowance of a
commercial/recreational use as a conditional use in the Industrial Park District.
DATE:
September 10, 2008
INTRODUCTION
Staff is proposing a text amendment to Section 10-5-21 (C) 2 of the City Code to allow
commercial recreational uses as a conditional use in the IP (Industrial Park) zoning district.
. The Planning Commission discussed this proposal at their August 12th meeting and was in
agreement with the proposed text amendment.
DISCUSSION
The commercial/recreational use is defined as follows:
COMMERCIAL RECREATIONAL USES: The provision of entertainment, games of
skill or lessons to the general public for a fee, including, but not limited to, dance and
karate studios, golf driving range, archery, and miniature golf.
The commercial/recreational use is currently allowed in the 1-1 zone as a conditional use. This
use is also allowed in the SSC (Spruce Street Commercial) and Mixed Use districts. Staff has
reviewed numerous locations for these types of uses in surrounding communities and has
determined that they are located in industrial districts. Because the buildings in industrial areas
typically have higher ceilings which accommodate the commercial recreation use, staff believes
that the IP zone is a good location for this use.
ACTION REOUESTED
.
Recommend approval of the text amendment for Section 10-5-21 (C) 2 of the City Code
allowing commercial recreational uses as a conditional use in the IP District and forward the
recommendation to the City Council.
.
.
.
Respectfully submitted,
Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
.
CITY OF FARMINGTON
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 10-5-21: IP
INDUSTRIAL PARK DISTRICT CONCERNING COMMERCIAL
RECREATIONAL USES AS A CONDITIONAL USE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. Section 10-5-21: IP Industrial Park District of the Farmington City Code is
amended as follows (new text is underlined):
(C)Uses:
2. Conditional:
.
Bus terminal.
Child daycare facilities, commercial.
Commercial recreational uses.
Manufacturing facilities.
Public utility buildings.
Truck terminal.
SECTION 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage and
publication according to law.
ADOPTED this _day of
Farmington.
, 2008, by the City Council of the City of
.
.
CITY OF FARMINGTON
By:
Kevan Soderberg, Mayor
ATTEST:
By:
Peter Herlofsky, Jr., City Administrator
SEAL
By:
Joel Jamnik, City Attorney
.
Published in the Farmington Independent the _ day of
,2008.
.
.
.
.
City of Farmington
430 Third Street
Farmington, Minnesota
651.463.7111 . Fax 651.463.2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO:
Planning Commission
Lee Smick, AICP ~
City Planner
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Text Amendment to Section 10-2-1 concerning defInitions and Section 10-6-14
concerning the allowance of cell towers in the Park/Open Space District.
DATE:
September 10, 2008
INTRODUCTION
The Planning Commission reviewed a draft of the Tower Ordinance to allow monopoles within
the P/OS (Park/Open Space) district on August 12, 2008. Staff has prepared the attached
ordinances to address the Commissioners' comments (Ex. A).
DISCUSSION
The text amendment to the defInitions section of the code is as follows:
Section 10-2-1:
Monopole: A wireless communications tower consisting of a single pole or spire supported by a
permanent foundation, constructed without guy wires and ground anchors.
Parks with Facilities: Parks that include playground equipment, shelter, ballfIeld, hockey rink,
soccer fIeld, or any other similar type facility.
Section 10-6-14:
The following is a list of items proposed for revision in this ordinance:
1. Monopole maximum height of75 feet in the P/OS district (parks with facilities only).
2. Monopoles in parks with facilities will be set back 75 feet except when qualifIed
engineer report specifIes that any collapse of pole will occur within a lesser distance.
3. One additional user is allowed on monopole.
4. No crows nests, platforms, or guy wires allowed on monopole.
5. Antenna arms are to be separated by 10 feet.
.
.
.
ACTION REOUESTED
Recommend approval of the Text Amendment to Section 10-2-1 concerning definitions and
Section 10-6-14 concerning the allowance of cell towers in the Park/Open Space District and
forwarded it to the City Council.
Respectfully submitted,
~~
Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
.
CITY OF FARMINGTON
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 10-2-1
DEFINITIONS AND SECTION 10-6-14: TOWERS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. The City of Farmington City Code, 10-2-1 Definitions is amended by
adding the underlined language and deleting the strikethrough language as follows:
Monopole: A wireless communications tower consisting of a single pole or spire
supported by a permanent foundation, constructed without guy wires and ground
anchors.
Parks with Facilities: Parks that include playground equipment, shelter, ballfield,
hockey rink, soccer field, or any other similar type facility.
.
SECTION 2. The City of Farmington City Code, 10-6-14 (B) Districts Allowed, is
amended by adding the underlined language and deleting the strikethrough language as
follows:
2. Towers or monopoles supporting commercial antennas and conforming to all
applicable provisions of this code shall be allowed as a conditional use within the A-
1... tmd I-I districts, and P IOS districts (parks with facilities).
SECTION 3. The City of Farmington City Code, 10-6-14 (E) Tower. Monopole. And
Antenna Design Requirements, is amended by adding the underlined language and
deleting the strikethrough language as follows:
Towers. monopoles. and antennas shall be designed to blend into the surrounding
environment through the use of color except in instances where the color is dictated
by federal or state authorities. One monopole allowed in parks with facilities. No
crows nests. platforms. or guy wires allowed on monopole in any approved district.
Antenna arms are to be separated by 10 feet.
SECTION 4. The City of Farmington City Code, 10-6-14 (F) Tower Setbacks, is
amended by adding the underlined language and deleting the strikethrough language as
follows:
.
.
1. Towers shall meet the setbaek requirements of the zoning distriet where located t-o
n height of f-orty five f-cet (45'). A monopole in parks with facilities will be set back
75 feet except when qualified engineer report specifies that any collapse of pole will
occur within a lesser distance.
2. Towers in residential, conservation and agricultural districts will be set back four
feet (4') for every foot of height exceeding forty five feet (45').
SECTION 5. The City of Farmington City Code, 10-6-14 (G) Tower and Monopole
Height, is amended by adding the underlined language and deleting the strikethrough
language as follows:
Towers, including all attached antennas, shall be limited to a maximum height of two
hundred feet (200'). A monopole in parks with facilities shall be limited to a
maximum height of seventy-five feet (75)'.
SECTION 6. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage and
publication according to law.
ADOPTED this _day of
Farmington.
, 2008, by the City Council of the City of
.
CITY OF FARMINGTON
By:
Kevan Soderberg, Mayor
ATTEST:
By:
Peter Herlofsky, City Administrator
SEAL
By:
Joel Jamnik, City Attorney
.
Published in the Farmington Independent the _ day of
, 2008.
.
.
.
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street
Farmington, Minnesota
651.463.7111 . Fax 651.463.2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO:
Planning Commission
Tony Wippler, Assistant City Planner 4
Draft amendment to Section 10-6-4(M) regarding parking in residential areas
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
September 10, 2008
INTRODUCTION
At last months regular meeting, staff had discussed with the Commission a proposed amendment
to the City Code as it pertains to off street parking, specifically, parking in residential areas. This
discussion occurred in response to a variance request from a downtown property owner to
construct a driveway adjacent to his side lot line.
DISCUSSION
Section 10-6-4(M) of the City Code states that all vehicles must be parked on a hard surface
driveway and that the driveway must be setback a minimum of five (5') feet from the side and
rear lot lines. This code is largely in place to ensure that a "hard surface" is not constructed
within any side or rear drainage and utility easements. The code as it currently reads is
particularly troublesome in the downtown residential areas where there are generally no side and
rear drainage and utility easements recorded on lots. Additionally, many of the existing
driveways (whether paved or not) are currently located adjacent to the side property line or
within the required five (5') foot setback. This code is not conducive to many of the "older"
properties throughout town and would require a variance similar to the Valek request a couple
months ago if the owners of many of these properties wanted to pave an existing gravel driveway
or improve an already paved driveway.
Below, is the proposed amendment that the Planning Commission discussed at its August
meeting and was generally in favor of. The proposed text to be added is underlined.
(M) Parking In Residential Areas: All vehicles shall be parked on a hard surface driveway or
parking apron. All parking areas shall maintain a five foot (5') setback from side and rear lot
lines. Exception: parcels that have no recorded side and rear drainage and utility easements
may have a driveway constructed adiacent to the side and rear lot lines. This exception is
subject to the submittal of a lot survey and grading plan acceptable to the City Engineer.
.
.
.
It should be noted that the proposed amendment includes the requirement of a lot survey and
grading plan to be submitted to the City Engineer. Staff feels the need for this requirement is
twofold. First, it would ensure that the driveway would not be constructed on an adjacent
property. Secondly, it would provide the City with the necessary comfort that the placement of
the driveway will not negatively affect the storm drainage in the area or intensify an already
existing drainage problem for surrounding properties.
ACTION REOUESTED
Recommend approval of the text amendment and forward that recommendation onto the City
Council.
Respectfully submitted,
~PJ tJ ;Q
Tony Wippler, mistant City Planner
.
CITY OF FARMINGTON
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 10-6-4:
OFF STREET PARKING CONCERNING PARKING
IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. Section 10-6-4: Off Street Parking of the Farmington City Code is amended as
follows (new text is underlined):
(M)Parking in Residential In Residential Areas: All vehicles shall be parked on a hard surface
driveway or parking apron. All parking areas shall maintain a five foot (5') setback from side
and rear lot lines. Exception: parcels that have no recorded side and rear drainage and utility
easements may have a driveway constructed adiacent to the side and rear lot lines. This
exception is subiect to the submittal of a lot survey and grading plan acceptable to the City
Engineer.
.
SECTION 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage and publication
according to law.
ADOPTED this
day of
,2008, by the City Council of the City of Farmington.
CITY OF FARMINGTON
By:
Kevan Soderberg, Mayor
ATTEST:
By:
Peter Herlofsky, Jr., City Administrator
SEAL
By:
Joel Jamnik, City Attorney
Published in the Farmington Independent the _ day of
,2008.
.
.
.
.
City of Farmington
430 Third Street
Farmington, Minnesota
651.463.7111 . Fax 651.463.2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO:
Planning Commission
FROM:
Lee Smick, AICP , i j./
City Planner \./0 ~
SUBJECT:
Discuss Garage/Shed Sizes and Driveway Issues
DATE:
September 10, 2008
INTRODUCTIONIDISCUSSION
City staff have been receiving shed and detached garage applications within the last month and
concerns from residents proposing to construct those types of structures range from desiring
larger sheds to concerns about the requirement to install a driveway to a detached garage.
Exhibit A consists of the September 11, 2007 staff memo to the Planning Commission detailing
the Council's preferences to the proposed for Accessory Structures. The minutes from the
September 11 ill meeting along with minutes from the Joint City Council/Planning Commission
Workshop held on October 17,2007 are also attached as Exhibits Band C.
As shown in the October 17th minutes, the City Council and Planning Commission deferred the
review of the ordinance revisions to a later date and requested that the revisions be addressed one
at a time. Now that the Drainage and Utility Easements revisions were approved by the City
Council on May 5, 2008, staff also felt it was an appropriate time to begin reviewing the existing
Shed and Detached Garage requirements that were discussed last year.
A synopsis of the latest rendition of the proposed ordinance dated September 11, 2007 is as
follows:
1. On June 18,2007, the City Council approved a revision to the Private Garage definition
requiring that access to a garage requires a paved driveway. The approved revision is as
follows:
GARAGE, PRlV ATE: An accessory building structure or accessory portion use of a
principal building structure which is intended for and used to store the private passenger
vehicles and trucks not exceeding twelve thousand (12,000) pounds gross weight, of the
family or families resident upon the premises, and in which no business service or
industry is carried on. Access to a garage requires a paved driveway.
. 2. Detached garage is defined as any accessory structure constructed at a 240 square-foot
minimum up to a maximum of 1,000, 1,250, or 1,500 square feet depending on the size of
the lot.
3. The detached garage requires a garage door, the ability to park a vehicle within the
garage, and it's to be constructed of similar materials as the principle building.
4. We may want to combine the Garage, Private definition with the details in #2 and #3 to
read as such:
GARAGE, PRIV ATE: An accessory structure (detached) or accessory use (attached) of a
principal structure which is intended for and used to store the private passenger vehicles
and trucks not exceeding twelve thousand (12,000) pounds gross weight, of the family or
families resident upon the premises, which requires a garage door, and in which no
business service or industry is carried on. A detached garage is any accessory structure
constructed at a 240 square-foot minimum up to a maximum of 1.000. 1.250. or 1.500
square feet depending on the size of the lot. Access to a garage requires a paved
driveway.
5. Questions concerning the paved driveway requirement to a detached garage include the
following:
.
Because detached garages are generally located behind the principle structure, and access
is gained along the side of the principle structure or attached garage typically in a
drainage and utility easement, the requirement for a paved driveway may not allow a
resident to construct a detached garage if the existing house and garage are built to the
easement lines on both sides. Does this limit opportunities for residents to construct
detached garages? Is the cost to install a paved driveway to the detached garage too cost
prohibitive to the resident? At the Joint Workshop (10/17/07) there was a comment "that
the city could allow people to drive on their grass to reach an accessory structure". Does
this mean that the driveway would begin outside of the drainage and utility easement and
that cars may drive on their easement with turf? The problem occurs that if there is
continued traffic within the easement with turf, driving on the easement may change
topography and cause drainage issues to the resident or adjacent residents.
The issues above are suggestions for discussions of the proposed ordinance dated September 17,
2007. Staff would appreciate further comments concerning the proposed text amendment.
ACTION REQUESTED
Provide comments to the September 11, 2007 text amendment proposal.
.
ReS;~~?~
~ibl~
City Planner
ex. A
.
CITY OF FARMINGTON
DAKOTACOUNTY,M~SOTA
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 10-5-6 (B) 2, 10-5-7 (B) 2,
10-5-8 (B) 2,10-5-9 (B) 2, 10-5-10 (B) 2,10-5-11 (B) 2,
10-5-12 (B) 2 CONCERNING DETACHED GARAGES AND
STORAGE SHEDS AND 10-6-6 (A) AND 10-6-6 (B) OF THE
FARMINGTON CITY CODE CONCERNING
ACCESSORY STRUCTURES
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. 10-5-6: R-l LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT:
(B) 2. Accessory Structure Standards: Accessory structures must be located behind
principal structure in the side or rear yard according to the following requirements:
.
Minimum - Maximum size
Detached garages:
Lots up to 0.5 acre 240 square feet to the lbesser of 1,000 square feet or square
feet of principal use structure
Lots 0.5 to 1 acre 240 square feet to the lbesser of 1,250 square feet or square
feet of principal use structure
Lots 1.0 acre + 240 square feet to the lbesser of 1,500 square feet or square
feet of principal use structure
Storage Shed Under 240 square feet of floor area.
Building Permit Any accessory structure over 120 square feet requires a
building permit.
Maximum number 1 of each
Side yard setback 6 feet
.
Rear yard setback 6 feet
.
Height (maximum) storage shed 12 feet
Height (maximum) detached garage 20 feet
All standards are minimum requirements unless noted.
SECTION 2. 10-5-7: R-2 LOWIMEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT:
(B) 2. Accessory Structure Standards: Accessory structures must be located behind
principal structure in the side or rear yard according to the following requirements:
Minimum - Maximum size
Detached garages
Lots up to 0.5 acre Minimum 240 square feet to the lbesser of 1,000 square
feet or square feet of principal 'I:!Se structure
Lots 0.5 to 1 acre Minimum 240 square feet to the lbesser of 1,250 square
feet or square feet of principal 'I:!Se structure
.
Lots 1.0 acre + Minimum 240 square feet to the lbesser of 1,500 square
feet or square feet of principal 'I:!Se structure
Storage Shed Under 240 square feet of floor area.
Building Permit Any accessory structure over 120 square feet requires a
building permit.
Apartment 1,800 square feet
Maximum number 1 of each
Side yard setback 6 feet
Rear yard setback
With alley 10 feet
Without alley 3 feet
Height (maximum) storage shed 12 feet
.
Height (maximum) detached garage 20 feet
All standards are minimum requirements unless noted.
.
SECTION 3. 10-5-8: R-3 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT:
(B) 2. Accessory Structure Standards: Accessory structures must be located behind
principal structure in the side or rear yard according to the following requirements:
Minimum - Maximum size
Detached garages square
feet of principal use
Storage Shed
Building Permit
Apartment
Maximum number
Side yard setback
.
Rear yard setback
Minimum 240 square feet to the lhesser of 1,000
square feet or square feet of principal structure
Under 240 square feet of floor area.
Any accessory structure over 120 square feet
requires a building permit.
1,800 square feet
1 of each
6 feet
With alley 10 feet
Without alley 3 feet
Height (maximum) storage shed 12 feet
Height (maximum) detached garage 20 feet
All standards are minimum requirements unless noted.
SECTION 4. 10-5-9: R-4 MEDIUM/HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT:
(B) 2. Accessory Structure Standards: Accessory structures must be located behind
principal structure in the side or rear yard according to the following requirements:
Minimum - Maximum size
.
Detached garages square
feet of principal use
Storage Shed
Minimum 240 square feet to the lbesser of 1,000
square feet or square feet of principal structure
Under 240 square feet of floor area.
.
Building Permit
Apartment
Maximum number
Any accessory structure over 120 square feet
requires a building permit.
1,800 square feet
1 of each
Side yard setback
Rear yard setback
Height (maximum) storage
shed
Height (maximum)
detached garage
All standards are minimum requirements unless noted.
6 feet
6 feet
12 feet
20 feet
SECTION 5. 10-5-10: R-5 IDGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT:
(B) 2. Accessory Structure Standards: Accessory structures must be located behind
principal structure in the side or rear yard according to the following requirements:
.
Minimum - Maximum size
Detached garages square
feet of principal use
Storage Shed
Building Permit
Apartment
Maximum number
Side yard setback
Rear yard setback
Height (maximum) storage
shed
Height (maximum)
detached garage
.
Minimum 240 square feet to the lksser of 1,000
square feet or square feet of principal structure
Under 240 square feet of floor area.
Any accessory structure over 120 square feet
requires a building permit.
1,800 square feet
1 of each
6 feet
6 feet
12 feet
20 feet
.
SECTION 6. 10-5-11: R-T DOWNTOWN TRANSITIONAL MIXED USE
DISTRICT:
(B) 2. Accessory Structure Standards: Accessory structures must be located behind
principal structure in the side or rear yard according to the following requirements:
Minimum - Maximum size
Detached garages square feet of Minimum 240 square feet to the lksser of 1,000
principal tiSe structure square feet or square feet of principal structure
Storage Shed Under 240 square feet of floor area.
Building Permit
Any accessory structure over 120 square feet
requires a building permit.
1,800 square feet
I of each
3 feet
Apartment
Maximum number
Side yard setback
Rear yard setback
.
With alley 10 feet
Without alley 3 feet
Height (maximum) storage shed 12 feet
Height (maximum) detached garage 20 feet
All standards are minimum requirements unless noted.
SECTION 7. 10-5-12: R-D DOWNTOWN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT:
(B) 2. Accessory Structure Standards: Accessory structures must be located behind
principal structure in the side or rear yard according to the following requirements:
Minimum - Maximum size
Detached garages Minimum 240 square feet to the lksser of 1,000 square
feet or square feet of principal tiSe structure
Storage Shed
Under 240 square feet of floor area.
.
Building Permit
building permit.
Any accessory structure over 120 square feet requires a
.
Apartment 1,800 square feet
Maximum number 1 of each
Side yard setback 3 feet
Rear yard setback
With alley 10 feet
Without alley 3 feet
Height (maximum) storage shed 12 feet
Height (maximum) detached garage 20 feet
All standards are minimum requirements unless noted. (Ord. 002-469, 2-19-2002;
amd. Ord. 004-515, 8-2-2004)
SECTION 8. 10-6-6: ACCESSORY BUILDINCS STRUCTURE:
.
Accessory buildings structures shall be permitted uses in residential districts and
conditional uses in business commercial and industrial districts subject to the following
conditions:
(A) Residential:
1. +hey Accessory structures shall be plaeed in the located behind principal structure
in the side or rear yard of the principal unit and at least ten feet (10') away from the
dwelling unit any structure if not attached.
2. +hey Storage sheds shall not exceed twelve feet (12') in building height and eRe
hundred twenty (120) under two-hundred forty (240) square feet of floor area.
3. +hey Accessory structures shall meet the minimum requirements of the building
code and be anchored in place as approved by the building inspector.
(B) Commercial And Industrial:
1. -B1ey Accessory structures shall be approved as part of the conditional use process.
2. -B1ey Accessory structures shall be constructed of similar materials as the principal
use.
.
3. +hey Accessory structures shall comply with minimum requirements of subsection
(A) of this section. (Ord. 002-469, 2-19-2002)
.
.
.
SECTION 9. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage and
publication according to law.
ADOPTED this _day of
Farmington.
, 2007, by the City Council of the City of
CITY OF FARMINGTON
By:
Kevan Soderberg, Mayor
ATTEST:
By:
Peter Herlofsky, City Administrator
SEAL
By:
City Attorney
Published in the Farmington Independent the _ day of
,2007.
.
1.
2.
.
.
el.15
Planning Commission
Minutes
Regular Meeting
September 11, 2007
Call to Order
Chair Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Members Present: Rotty, Oswald, Larson, Barker, Burke
Members Absent: None
Also Present: Tony Wippler - Assistant City Planner, Lee Smick - City Planner
Stephen Pierskalla and Karen Davis, Michael Bischel, Kimberly
Sperling
Approval of Minutes
a) August 14, 2007, Regular Meeting
Commissioner Oswald stated that there is a typo on page 3 under section C. The
motion was seconded by Commissioner Barker, not Commissioner Oswald.
MOTION by Oswald, second by Larson to approve the August 14, 2007 minutes
with the noted correction. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Commissioner Barker was
not present for this vote.
Continued Business
a) Amend Ordinance - Detached Garages, Storage Sheds and Accessory Structures
Applicant: City of Farmington
325 Oak Street
Farmington, MN 55024
The Farmington City Council discussed this item at their August 20, 2007 meeting.
The Council expressed concern regarding sheds that are between 200-240 square feet
in size. The proposed ordinance change does not address these structures. The City
Council would like the ordinance modified to reflect that sheds under 240 square feet
maximum are allowed. There would be a requirement for a building permit for any
accessory structure over 120 square feet in size. The City Council would also like to
keep the requirement for a paved driveway to a detached garage. Commissioner
Larson stated that the requirement for paved driveways will preclude many
homeowners from having detached garages because they can not pave over drainage
and utility easements. There has been discussion regarding scheduling a joint
Planning Commission/City Council meeting to discuss this item and several other
issues. Commissioner Burke felt that the height requirement might be low for the
larger shed sizes. Commissioner Oswald stated that he would also like have a joint
meeting to discuss this item. Chair Rotty stated that he would like to have this item
discussed at the workshop that has been scheduled for October 17,2007. MOTION
by Burke, second by Oswald to continue this item until the November Planning
Commission meeting. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
.
I.
.
Council / Planning Commission Workshop
Minutes
October 17, 2007
Gj.e,
Mayor Soderberg called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
Present:
Soderberg, Fogarty, McKnight, Pritzlaff, Wilson
Rotty, Burke, Larson, Oswald
Barker
Peter Herlofsky, City Administrator; Lee Smick, City Planner; Tony Wippler,
Assistant City Planner
Absent:
Also Present:
Comprehensive Plan Update
Planning staff presented a spreadsheet to the City Council and Planning Commission showing
that between 2000-2007 Farmington had granted 2,270.29 of MUS A acres. The 2020
Comprehensive Plan proposed a total of 1,620 acres of MUS A by 2020. The City Planner
explained that in 1998 when the 1,620 acres was proposed, there was a total of30 acres of
low/medium density residential and 0 acres was proposed for high density residential.
Additionally, there was only 20 acres proposed for commercial. This showed that in 1998, there
was not much emphasis put on these types ofland uses. Another factor that was discussed is that
the City has annexed 1,407 acres ofland between 2004-2007 that was not even imagined as a
possibility in 1998.
The City Planner stated that she has had numerous discussions with the Met Council Sector
Representative Patrick Boylan concerning the overage of2,270.20 acres versus the 1,620 acres
proposed in 2020. She stated a number of factors that were agreed upon by the Sector
Representative concerning this overage. 1) Farmington will review the 2030 Comprehensive
Plan every 2-3 years in order to follow the growth rate more closely. 2) Farmington currently
has a 3-4 year supply of vacant lots at 879, justifying the need to review the 2030 plan every 2-3
years. 3) The City Council has agreed to the Metropolitan Council's 2020 population forecast
for Farmington of 32,000. 4) Farmington will grow into the allocated residential MUSA of
1,102.27 acres. 5) The City has submitted 15 Comprehensive Plan Amendments within the past
two years, allowing the adjacent jurisdictions to sign off on the growth in Farmington. 6) The
City Planner is constantly in touch with the Metropolitan Council Sector Representative. 7) The
Sector Representative has stated that because of the expansion of the Empire Treatment Plan,
Farmington's growth could be accommodated.
The schedule shows a September 12 2008; submittal to Met Council, but staff can request an
extension. The market study has slowed down the process comprehensive planning process.
The City Council and Planning Commission suggested removing all commercial and industrial
west of Fair green Avenue and designating it agriculture. If a willing land seller requests MUSA,
Farmington will only review a proposal that has a concrete development plan. The market study
shows that the commercial acreage total is 140 acres. The 140 acres includes the 128 within the
Spruce Street Commercial area that is comp planned as commercial but is vacant. The
Charleswood Marketplace development constituting 4.56 acres would also be a part of the 140
acres. The City Council and Planning Commission also suggested that commercial be
designated at the northwest comer of Pilot Knob Road and CRSO because this intersection will
be highly utilized in the future. Staff suggested going 500 ft in on both sides of Pilot Knob
toward CRSO and designate that as commercial and the rest as industrial for now. A consensus
was reached with staff's recommendations. Staff is proposing November 8, 2007 for a
neighborhood meeting.
.
Council/Planning Commission Workshop
October 17, 2007
Page 2
Downtown Lot Subdivisions
The two residential zoning districts that ring the downtown area are R-T and R-D. Both of these
allow for the existing older high density residential as well as higher density two-family
dwellings. There are two properties that meet the requirement for a lot split. Some of the
properties have homes that are newer, the location of the home may prohibit the lot split, but
meet the size requirements. Typically you want higher density closer to downtown. Staff
wanted to know if the Council and Planning Commission are comfortable with allowing lot splits
in the downtown area. The R- T and R -D was set up for higher density. The R-2 is for single and
two-family homes. The question was raised whether higher density should be allowed by
individual lot or if an entire block should be designated for high density. It was also noted in the
downtown none of the homes look alike and there is a certain feel to the downtown area. Staff is
working on the historic overlay district for the downtown area. So far this district goes to
Walnut and encompasses a large part of the R-D district. Infill development would be required
to follow the standards set in the overlay district. Members asked about the intent for the lots in
the R-2 district and if the larger lots were intended to be a buffer for the railroad tracks. This
may not concern the City at large, but it could be a concern for neighbors. A resident noted the
residential area next to downtown as been in existence for 147 years and asked the City to think
twice before messing with 147 years of precedence and start putting homes in people's
backyards. Another resident noted going south from Feely Elevator, the lots become larger.
From Honeysuckle Lane the lots are smaller with newer development. Currently there are no
. homes that do not have street frontage. A resident wants to divide their lot for two duplexes and
a single family home and make them one-story to match the other homes. There are two
duplexes north of this property. Staff noted the code needs to be reviewed, as a street is defined
as any street or roadway, public or private, but not to include private driveways. In another
portion of the code it says a lot can be split on a City approved street. Staff needs to determine if
a City approved street is a street that will be maintained by a homeowners association and can be
split with no right-of-way, or is a City approved street a public right-of-way. Staffwill talk to
the City Attorney regarding the definition of a City approved street. The City Council and
Planning Commission determined that lot splits should not occur unless on a City approved
street.
~ Ordinance Revisions
City Planner Smick explained the problems that are occurring with people putting landscaping in
the drainage and utility easements. Some of the landscaping is affecting the swale of the water.
There are also problems with parking of recreational vehicles. Currently the codes states
recreational vehicles can be parked on the drainage and utility easement if there is decorative
rock. This is also causing problems with water flowing to neighbors property instead of out to
the street. Anything parked in front of the house has to be on a paved surface. Many homes only
have a 6 ft. setback on the sides and this does not leave room for recreational vehicle parking.
Staff proposes allowing decorative rock for parking, but it must stay out of the drainage and
utility easement.
.
StaiTis proposing sheds be less than 240 sq. ft. of floor area, right now they are at 120 sq. ft.
The height will continue to be 12 ft. A building permit will be required for any accessory
structure over 120 sq. ft. Currently a paved driveway is required for detached garages, however,
.
I.
i
I.
Council/Planning Commission Workshop
October 17, 2007
Page 3
a paved surface is not allowed in drainage and utility easements. The City could allow people to
drive on their grass to reach an accessory structure.
The City could tell drainage and utility companies they are no longer allowed on private
property. In new subdivisions, owners will have to locate utility lines and can plant trees
anywhere outside this area.
Building Inspections is trying to catch encroachments into easements as inspections are done or
the City will go out when there are problems with drainage. Staff is proposing nothing in the
drainage and utility easements except utilities and turf and fences. Recreational vehicles would
have to be parked within the property. No pavement will be allowed in these easements.
Engineering would like to continue to keep the drainage easement in the front yards.
Staffwill research the utility companies and the 30 ft. setback. If the City starts telling residents
they cannot have landscaping in easements, that will affect a lot of people. Before an ordinance
is approved, the City will need someone to enforce it. Staff wanted to know if they should just
deal with the problems and start to educate people. If everyone agrees that the ordinance should
be enforced, it would make things easier.
When these are brought back to Council, they should be addressed one at a time. Due to the time
of year, this will be discussed again at a later time.
The meeting adjourned at 8:22 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
~)-r?~
~thia Muller
Executive Assistant
.
.
.
City of Farmington
430 Third Street
Farmington, Minnesota
651.463.7111 . Fax 651.463.2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO:
Planning Commission
Tony Wippler, Assistant City Planner ~
Findings of Fact - Amendment to a previously approved Conditional Use Permit
- POR-MKR, Real Estate, LLC
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
September 10, 2008
INTRODUCTION / DISCUSSION
Attached, please find the Findings of Fact for the Planning Commission's denial of the requested
amendment to a previously approved Conditional Use Permit by POR-MKR Real Estate, LLC.
Please review and either approve and/or request revisions to the findings.
ACTION REOUESTED
Review the Findings of Fact and either approve/or request revisions to the findings.
Respectfully submitted,
;;;~
Tony Wippler, Assistant City Planner
Cc: Patrick Regan, POR-MKR, Real Estate, LLC
.
.
.
CITY OF FARMINGTON
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
IN RE:
Application of POR-MKR Real Estate, LLC
For an amendment to a previously
Approved Conditional Use Permit for
A Bus and Truck Terminal in the IP District
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND DECISION
On August 12, 2008 the Farmington Planning Commission met to consider the
application of POR-MKR Real Estate, LLC to amend a previously approved Conditional
Use Permit in order to move the property's approved access off the property to a shared
driveway. The applicant was present and the Planning Commission heard testimony
from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The property is located at 5031 208th Street and is zoned IP (Industrial Park) in
which a Bus and Truck Terminal is a Conditional Use.
2. A Conditional Use Permit [CUP] and Site Plan approval was granted to POR-
MKR, Real Estate, LLC by Farmington's Planning Commission on July 10,2007.
3. The approved CUP and Site Plan from July 10,2007 showed a drive access to the
subject property that was located entirely on the subject property.
4. The approved access is considered temporary until such time that Eastview
A venue is extended south to connect with 208th Street.
5. The Building Permit and Construction Plans were approved with the drive access
being located entirely on the subject property.
6. Patrick Regan, representing POR-MKR real Estate, LLC, requested an
amendment to the CUP and Site Plan that were approved on July 10, 2007 on July
21,2008.
7. The proposed amendment was to relocate the majority of the approved access off
the subject property (5031 208th Street) and onto property owned by the City's
Economic Development Authority and Bernard Murphy.
8. An existing gravel drive exists to the east of the subject property that is currently
used to access a manufactured home owned and located on Bernard Murphy's
property.
.
.
.
9. The existing gravel drive does encroach onto the property owned by the City's
Economic Development Authority.
10. The amendment was to upgrade the existing gravel drive to accommodate a
shared driveway to be used by Bernard Murphy and POR-MKR, Real Estate,
LLC.
11. The proposed amendment would place a hard surfaced driveway within a City
Drainage and Utility Easement.
12. According to City Code, no impervious surface is allowed in a Drainage and
Utility Easement.
13. No agreement between the applicant and Bernard Murphy and the City's
Economic Development Authority had been executed for use of their respective
properties.
14. It was determined by the City's Planning Commission that approval of this
amendment would set a precedence that could potentially set the City up for
future requests to utilize City owned property.
DECISION
Applicant's request to amend the approved CUP from July 10,2007 in order to relocate
the approved property access is denied.
CITY OF FARMINGTON
BY:
Planning Chair
ATTEST:
Its Administrator