HomeMy WebLinkAbout7/10/07
City of. Farmington
325 Oak Street .
Farrntnaum, MN 55024
.".....
:\ '.,
. v
..
AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION
July 10p 2007
7:00 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
A RroudPast . A
Committed to Provl
Tlmelyond
1.
CALL TO ORDER
J
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
a) June 12, 2007
r
3. PUBLIC HEARINGS
\~,-
.~
.)
r...............'...
f ( 4.
Pederson Auto Shop
101 31d Street
Farmington, MN 55024
c) Conditional Use Permit to loCate an 6ff-premises d~recttOnal sign
APplicant:
Applicant: Church of St. Michael
22120 Denmark Avenue
Farmington, MN 55024
d) Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan to allow an Auto Repair, Major Business in the
Applicant: John Milde
P.O. Box 957
Lakevflle, MN 55044
e) Amendment to the Farmington BuSiness Park PUD concerning Screen1", re<lulrements
Applicant: City of Farmington
325 Oak Street
Farmington, MN 55024
f) Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan, to aUow a Bus and Truck Terminal in the IP zoning district
Applicant:
POR-MKR Real Estate, LLC
101 East 10th Street, Suite 300
Hastings, MN 55033
DISCUSSION
a) Development Sketch Plan - Michael Bischel - 808 2nd Street
b) Discu$Sfon concerning Drainage and Utility Easements and Recreational Vehicle Parkinl
5. ADJOURN
c) Discusston concemtnt Sheds/~ Garagfi
d) Discussion conc:ernins PylOn Sign$/SiIns on WheelS .
e) Discussion. ardi the 0..u'5 ~"'~I
reg ns."" ct.... . .,~'
( ,
\.
'"
.
.
.
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO:
Planning Commission
Tony Wippler i,f{
Assistant City Planner '-" J
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Neighborhood Preservation Overlay District (Con't)
DATE:
July 10, 2007
INTRODUCTION I DISCUSSION
A public hearing was set and opened at the regular planning commission meeting held on June 12,
2007 regarding the adoption of an ordinance that would allow for the future creation of an overlay
zone that would assist in the preservation of Farmington's historic neighborhoods.
A number of residents as well as a majority of the Planning Commission felt that an ordinance was
premature at this time and that there should be a district delineated with the creation of the ordinance.
In addition, the Commission made it clear that any district should have complete buy in from the
property owners within the proposed district. The Commission voted 3-0 to continue the public
hearing until the July 10, 2007 meeting in order for planning staff to further review a possible district
to be included with the proposed ordinance.
ACTION REQUESTED
At this time, staff is requesting that this item be withdrawn in order for staff to research and possibly
delineate an initial district boundary to be included with the ordinance at time of adoption.
Respectfully submitted,
t;~
Tony Wippler, Assistant City Planner
Cc: Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Lee Smick, AICP ,i \('
City Planner ..... 'fj-J
SUBJECT: Revise Sections 10-2-1 concerning storable pools, 1O-5-11(C) concerning RT zone, 10-5-
12 (A, B, C) concerning RD zone, 10-6-1 and 10-6-1 (A) sub. 5 concerning residential
swimming pools, and 10-6-3 (B, C) concerning signs
DATE: July 10, 2007
INTRODUCTIONIDISCUSSION
.
The Planning Division published notices for storable pools, residential swimming pools, and revisions to
the R- T zone. Upon further review of potential revisions to these items, it became apparent that these
ordinances do not require revisions, and therefore, staff is recommending that these items be withdrawn.
R- D Zonine: District
Staff is recommending that the purpose statement for the R-D zoning district be revised to most closely
describe the district. Additionally, staff is proposing to include two provisions addressing the lot width
requirement for lots other than single and two-family uses and include density standards for the district
(Exhibit A).
Sie:n Code
Staff is proposing a number of revisions to the sign code (Exhibit B). Most of the revisions include the
need to change the text of "monument signs" to "monument identification signs" in order to provide a
consistency in the code. Additionally, staff is proposing to delete "Area ofIdentification Sign" and utilize
the monument identification sign in its place. Staff is also proposing to delete "Beacons" and also to
replace "Off-Premises Advertising Signs" with "Billboards". Finally, staff is proposing to replace
"Business and Advertising Signs" with "Miscellaneous Signs" and replace "Advertising Signs" with
"Obsolete Signs".
ACTION REQUESTED
.
Staff recommends the following:
1. Withdraw Sections 10-2-1 concerning storable pools, 10-5-11(C) concerning RT zone, and 10-6-1
and 10-6-1 (A) sub. 5 concerning residential swimming pools.
.
2. Recommend approval of Exhibits A and B as described and forward the recommendations to the
City Council.
~~.
Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
.
.
C:X.A
.
CITY OF FARMINGTON
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 10-5-12 (A) AND
10-5-12 (B) CONCERNING THE R-D DOWNTOWN
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT:
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. Section 10-5-12: R-D Downtown Residential District of the Fannington
City Code is amended as follows:
.
(A)Purpose: The R-D downtown residential district recognizes the development patterns
of the original residential areas ofFannington adjacent to the downtown. The purpose
ofthe R-D district is to accommodate existing higher density single family aad two-
family and multi-family residential development and promote infill ofmgh deflsity
single-family. two-family and multi-family residential development within the
downtown area in order to strengthen the downtown, create pedestrian friendly
neighborhoods, and decrease the need for automobile use through mixed uses. (Ord.
002-469,2-19-2002)
(B)Bulk And Density Standards:
1. Minimum Standards:
Lot area
Minimum 6,000 square feet
Maximum 14,400 square feet
Single-family 6,000 square feet
Two-family 11,000 square feet
Other 11,000 square feet
Lot width
.
Single- family 60 feet
Two-family 75 feet
Other 75 feet
.
Front yard setback 20 feet
Side yard setback 5 feet
Rear yard setback 6 feet
Height (maximum) 35 feet
Maximum lot coverage of all structures 35 percent
All standards are minimum requirements unless noted.
Net dwelling units per acre
Twin home
7.0
Two-family
6.0
Townhouse
8.5
Multi-family
14.0+
All standards are minimum reauirements unless noted.
.
SECTION 2. 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.
.
.
eJ.8
.
CITY OF FARMINGTON
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 10-6-3 (B) AND
10-6-3 (C) OF THE FARMINGTON SIGN CODE:
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. Section 10-6-3 (B) 3: B-1, B-2, B-3, B-4, and I-I Zoning District of the
Fannington City Code are amended as follows:
.
(b) Monument Identification Signs: Monument identification signs are permitted
up to one hundred (100) square feet in sign area with a height maximum often feet
(10') from the ground (including the base) to the top of the sign. The sign must be
set back ten feet (10') or more from the property line and shall not be located
within the thirty foot (30') triangle of visibility at street intersections. Monument
identification signs in the B-4 district may be illuminated between eight o'clock
(8:00) A.M. and ten o'clock (10:00) P.M. and shall be in compliance with section
10-6-8 of this chapter.
(d) Area Of ldentifioatiOfl Sign: The area identification sign for a shopping eem:er,
stating the name of the center aad the major teaants, shall be allowed. The
maximum size and height shall conform to the requirements of subsection (B)3( 0)
of this section.
(g) Beacons: Re';oh'ing beooons, beamed lights or similar de:"lices shan be
permitted in all B and I distriets provided that the-y do Bot so distroot automobile
traffic as to constitute a safety hazard. l\ co:nditiOflal use permit shall be required.
(i) Off Premises f..dyertising Signs Billboards:
(1) Billboards and other off premises adyertisiag signs shall be permitted only in
the I-I district.
(2) A conditional use permit is required for all billboard~ and other off premises
ad';ertising signs.
.
(3) The maximum sign size shall be three hundred (300) square feet in sign area.
Billboards may incorporate cutouts protruding beyond the framed perimeter of
the sign face, providing the total sign area does not exceed three hundred fifty
(350) square feet.
.
(4) The maximum height to the uppermost portion of any advertising device
shall be thirty feet (30'). The building setback limitation for the zoning district in
which the sign is located shall apply to setbacks for a<hertising sigas billboards.
(5) The minimum radius distance between advertising signs billboards shall be
one thousand five hundred feet (1,500').
(6) No billboard or other off premises advertising sign structure shall be
constructed within five hundred feet (500') of any park or residential zoning
district.
(7) No billboard or other off premises ad.:ertising sign shall be located closer to
any intersection than five hundred feet (500').
(8) Billboards and other off premises adyertising signs shall be a single support,
metal structure, free of supports or guywires. The metal shall be treated in such a
manner as to prevent deterioration.
.
(9) Billboards may be illuminated provided that there are no flashing,
intermittent or moving lights, and that beams or rays of light are not directed
toward any portion of public streets.
(10) Billboards and other off premises ad'lertismg signs are permitted in
undeveloped land areas. When a plat is approved and improvements are in place,
the billboard must be removed from the site.
SECTION 2. Section 10-6-3 (B) 4: IP Zoning District of the Farmington City Code is
amended as follows:
(a) Single Occupant Building:
(1) Monument Identification Sign: One monument identification sign for each
principal structure or legal parcel. Lots adjacent to more than one street may
have one sign per street frontage. Signs shall not exceed sixty (60) square feet in
sign area per sign with a maximum height of six feet (6'). Said signs shall be
located at least ten feet (10') from the nearest property line and in no case shall
be permitted within the thirty foot (30') triangle of visibility at public or private
street intersections or driveway intersections.
(b) Multiple Occupant Building:
(1) Monument Identification Sign: One monument identification sign may be
erected on a lot. The sign shall not exceed seventy five (75) square feet in sign
area and ten feet (10') in height. Monument identification signs may include the
name of the development and up to four (4) tenants of the development. Said
signs shall be located at least ten feet (10') from the nearest property line and in
no case shall be permitted within the thirty foot (30') triangle of visibility at
public or private street intersections or driveway intersections.
.
SECTION 3. Section 10 (B) 5: Spruce Street Commercial, Mixed Use, And
BusinessIFlex Zoning Districts ofthe Fannington City Code is amended as follows:
.
(a) Single Occupant Building:
(1) Monument Identification Sign.:
A. Under one hundred thousand (100,000) square feet: One monument
identification sign for each principal structure or legal parcel. Lots adjacent to
more than one street may have one sign per street frontage. Signs shall not
exceed one hundred (100) square feet in sign area per sign with a maximum
height often feet (10'). Said signs shall be located at least ten feet (10') from
the nearest property line and in no case shall be permitted within the thirty
foot (30') triangle of visibility at public or private street intersections or
driveway intersections.
.
B. Over one hundred thousand (100,000) square feet: One monument
identification sign per street frontage for each principal structure or legal
parcel. Lots adjacent to more than one street may have one sign per street
frontage. Primary sign shall not exceed one hundred fifty (150) square feet in
sign area per sign with a maximum height of fifteen feet (15'); secondary
street frontage sign shall not exceed sixty (60) square feet in area per sign with
a maximum height of six feet (6'). Said signs shall be located at least ten feet
(10') from the nearest property line and in no case shall be permitted within
the thirty foot (30') triangle of visibility at public or private street intersections
or driveway intersections.
(b) Multiple Occupant Building:
(1) Monument Identification Sign: One monument identification sign per street
frontage may be erected on a lot. Lots adjacent to more than one street may have
one sign per street frontage. Primary sign shall not exceed two hundred (200)
square feet in sign area per sign with a maximum height of twenty feet (20');
secondary street frontage sign shall not exceed seventy five (75) square feet in
sign area per sign with a maximum height of six feet (6'). Monument
identification signs may include the name of the development and up to four (4)
tenants of the development. Said signs shall be located at least ten feet (10') from
the nearest property line and in no case shall be permitted within the thirty foot
(30') triangle of visibility at public or private street intersections or driveway
intersections.
SECTION 4. Section 10-6-3 (C): Signs Prohibited of the Farmington City Code is
amended as follows:
Section 10-6-3 (C):
5. Business And A-<hertising Miscellaneous Signs: Such signs shall not be painted,
attached or in any manner affixed to trees, rocks or similar natural surfaces, nor shall
such signs be affixed to a fence or utility pole.
.
.
7. Ad'lertising Obsolete Signs: Signs which advertise an activity, business, product or
service that has not been produced or conducted on the premises for more than thirty
(30) days and are considered obsolete.
SECTION 5. 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.
.
.
.
.
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO:
Planning Commission
Lee Smick, AICP ( 19./
City Planner .../D<'::i
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Variance to the Location of a Wall Sign
Applicant: Pedersen Auto Shop
101 3rd Street
Farmington, MN 55024
DATE:
July 10, 2007
INTRODUCTION
The applicant, Pedersen Auto Shop, is seeking a variance (Exhibit A) from Section 10-6-3 (B)
sub. 3a of the City Code permitting one wall sign per building front in the B-3 Zoning District
for the property at 101 3rd Street. The variance request is to allow a wall sign on a building face
that does not front a street.
DISCUSSION
The zoning code from Section 10-6-3 (B) sub. 3a is as follows:
3. B-1, B-2, B-3, B-4, and 1-1 Zoning Districts:
(a) Wall Signs: One wall sign is permitted per building front as follows for each zoning
district:
B-3 Zone - 16 percent of facade (300 square foot maximum)
Pedersen Auto Shop is requesting a variance from this code section (Exhibit B, Items 1-5) in
order to install a business wall sign on a wall that does not front a street. The applicant is
proposing a 40 square foot sign (allowed by code) to be located on the southwest comer of the
building to increase the business' visibility from Elm and 3rd Streets. The south side of the
building does not front a street; therefore, a variance is being requested.
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 physical surroundings including existing trees and shrubs near the property are
currently causing the hardship issue for visibility. As shown on Item 5, trees and
shrubs on the railroad property obscure the building from visibility.
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.
The hardship issue for visibility and the south side of the building not fronting a street
are unique to this property.
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 of visibility was not created by the applicant.
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.
In order to assist with the visibility of the building, a sign is proposed for the south
side of the building not fronting a street in order to eliminate the hardship.
ACTION REQUESTED
Approve the variance request to allow a wall sign on a building face that does not front a street
within the B-3 Zoning District in order to eliminate the visibility hardship.
~~.'2
~lik, AICP .,
City Planner
. cc: Douglas Pedersen, Pedersen Auto Shop
2
.
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463.7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farminirton.mn.us
EX.A
.
.
II
VARIANCE APPLICATION
Applicant: Jb>eR (~tJ AUf /) 5 i-t 6 F Telephone: cG5.D 4(. J - 11' I
Address: I Di 1lR() S7~Ef1 ~A&J1I~1oJJ M ~
Street '"1 . . City State
Owner: '!>OlKLAC R. 1/{/)QSc5J./ Telephone: ~ q (.) - ~n L Fax: LJ
Address: Jt.l /'111/-1 Sf /;.J f;M-JIl/l)~td-'-' (V1 V
Street City State
Premises Involved: I 0 I ~ R V 5 ff( Ef r rli. 1fJ1/1J~101J
Address! Legal Description Oot, block, plat name, section, township, range)
Current Zoning District 'B 3 . Current Land Use
Specific Nature of Request/ Claimed Hardship: 6tJ1'D(tJ~ 5 (4}J LOLA \1100
II
Fax: chffi_4'3 - 7"'1
c; c; DU
Zip Code
t)~62fL
Zip Code
SUBMITTAL REOUIREMENTS
o Proof of Ownership
o Application Fee ($200)
o Boundary / Lot Survey
TI~
o Copies of Site Plan
o AbstractlResidential List (adjoining property owners only)
o Torre.. (Own,,', DUPli~tle Requrredl
'-/1-0 .~
Date Signatu of ApplIcant
.'. -~. ::':"
. .
. Req~stSubmi~d .~ the pj~:n~ing Co~ml~sioi?- on. .
Public Hearing Set, for: . . .. .
'-;. . "'i ..-- - -, ., ,', .... ,'.. ,- ",' :'~_'
Ad~ertisedll,:1 tocal NeVvspaper:
;'-:';\'.0',; :":~-..:__..-:-,,',,'" ... >- ._,..:.:',: - -' .."..- - ..
c''':-. _", ',-," ",",_,:::, ."
. ...-' Denied. -
" '.;~;' . 'J'{< ,....- ',,_
~.., ,...; .'-.' .'.' . ,_.,..' .. .'. .'.', . ", . , .""'"' . ., -," '::.-" -, "',_ '_" .:' ..,.,.- " n" . _ ""
P13nlling C0111Tr.,issiori Action:: <> ... . .-, > Approved..
;:'-;:::o::~~';'~':E~:i~r::\' .'.-' :>('~:::~"::~~'~~--'''''-<':~~ ,"'::;'-,'.:-.,. '-.:>;":,.,,~:,-,--;,-.' ".'. . ,,;,' :..', <.:' >, :'.::.,-' ;. _.: -.
. comments:.... ..;. . ...
..:--.j;;,.,'....;
ConditioriSSet:
." .... .....
'..:"-. ....:,.._,"..-...-,;..'.".,
Planning division: .
..Date:
C - Ie" fI7
Date
9/06
a.8
.
Pedersen Auto Shop
101 3rd Street
Farmington, Mn. 55024
651-463-2111
651-463-7663 fax
Farmington Planning Commission,
.
Pedersen Auto Shop is applying for a "Hardship
Variance" for the placement of an outdoor sign. There is
little room and poor drive by visibility on west end (front of
building, facing 3rd Street) of building for signage. I would
like to install a sign on the southwest comer of building
facing south, more visible from the south (Elm and 3rd
Streets).
Sign type: aluminum framed, translucent white plastic face,
black lettering, back lighted, flush mount to wall.
Size: 4 foot by 10 foot. Letter size; 16 inches tall. Number
size; 10 inches tall.
Sign would be located about 1 foot below soffitt and 8 feet
from ground. Wall is 13 feet tall, 80 feet long.
Sign designed and built by Godfrey's Custom Signs.
Refer to photo #4 for approximate size and location.
Thank you for your consideration,
.
6/19/07
i;,7Ii~n (own~)
.
.
r.
0, i
. .
I
I;
""
I
I
/
.
.
-~
}
J
I
I
I
/
<
.,.,
J
-
r
I
/ I
I
I / 3'
f I , ~.
. I ,
f J
I J"
/ I
I j'
I I
I 'jl
I I .
I t. I':'
!t"\
II.;
,f
I
I
~
r I
I
I
I
I J
I I
, I
I /
, I
/
I I
,
I
I
I
/
I
!
\..(.
.....:..'\.\.
.'~ .._hi'"-'tf
..~ "
" ,- ~.
,.
I.
.....
"
, ".
f ~,.
~:.
,- .
1:':' .
}~ '\ ""
, I
~:~f~~ ~ '~
\$~
.'!..'~~ .
~~ \t
.s~ ~(;.
~(l ~~ 1'" V
oi!J.... ..: ,~: \-. ~:
." '. ,.lit. ..- l
.,.,..~ ~. "', t
.-, l ';~a ~ '~,~ ;i~'\~.
.....'...~' t;.:;.'t;>}~
. ,.' .~~..:l. ~'i:~. ,f; .~~
. . ~.~.t '1;\<! '\ -
~\... \.'\' ..\...~~1"t,.
.. .~. ~". ).;'\~.~';-
. < : .~"t
. ~('\.
~,
"
r
-,
i
.
I
I
I
I
!.
.
-~/-
. ~ t
,.
t ~ ..
,
\
i ~'~,l <
, .
- " . .
\ '\", i:
,:~:~; ,:.,: .
. '\, .
..... 'I......, _ ,
J .~ . . ~..~
c}~,;l~ ''.,', ' _ '.
ij)ft 1..~- p~~ ,t\' _ ~
'(fI.:.;,," ..~~_> 'f.,):'.~
~.- l. ...~". '; ;"..~':;,',
I ~
{''I..
~ f. .;,
,
..:' fJ _~~.'.:
.: ,;,~~,)/\.
;: ~g.,
~ j.~
-~
,;.~
. n....<II
i.!'~! 4. ":~i l"
. "0
,',
...
i,
);: -\,-
,. ~~':,~.
! '~'-,'\\~,.
.~;.;..
. ',J.)'
. /1.':-. ~
.;: ,.-' ~.).~
. . .. ') .' - ~ 't"l"
' ~..tii'f '
."'"",
f'
.
4
f
.
, \
. j., ~;
1-,
... ."
..'J::~
''l'
\~
> ,
"
. \
.
,'" ,
'.-;\,
~,~
,~;
. .;,~.
-;-It;1
.", t,l _,
~:~~};l\~ "'to, ,
.,.~..,,~
-, ~~
t.,. -~ ~"'J
.Y ,
t (
.~ 'J~f~,. ~
\ . ,,,.- 4;1."
. '.
~. ....
';' '-. ". .-.
.'
.
/
/
.
.
.
Jun 14 07 04:33p
GodTre~ Custom Signs
651-463-4519
If'. 1
~
GODPRltV'S ~
gU .
19682'ChippendaleAve. W.. Farmington, MN 55024. 651.463.4519. Fax 651.460.4410
Ii Ie -10'slf"
7J Is -16" tAU 6 Is -1011 tAU
651.463.2111
.
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO:
Planning Commission
Lee Smick, AICP Il~
City Planner v 7t
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Conditional Use Permit - Off Premises Directional Sign - St. Michael's
Catholic Church
DATE:
July to, 2007
INTRODUCTIONIDISCUSSION
.
S1. Michael's Catholic Church is requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the
purpose of installing a three (3) square foot (18"x24") off-premises directional sign (Exhibit A). The
proposed sign will be located on the Independent School District 192's property at the northeast
intersection of Akin Road and CSAH 50 (Exhibit B). The School District has approved this location
on its property (Exhibit C) between the baseball field backstop and the City trail. The sign will be
made of aluminum and will be installed per Dakota County standards (Exhibit D).
St. Michael's was also requesting off-premise sign locations in front on Castle Rock Bank (not within
the boundaries of Farmington) and on the K & K Auto Ranch property (did not meet yard setback
requirements).
The City Code concerning off-premises directional signs is as follows:
(b) Off Premises Directional Signs: For the purpose of providing off premises direction
to a residential project described in this subsection, or to a new venture less than
twelve (12) months following the issuance of an occupancy permit, or to a public,
reliaious or nonprofit institution, or to a use which, in the determination of the planning
commission, incurs substantial hardship from lack of reasonable identification as a
result of its location, a conditional use permit shall be required. Such sign shall not
exceed twenty five (25) square feet per face and such sign shall conform to the yard
requirements of the zoning district in which it is located. If said sign is lighted, it shall
be illuminated only during those hours when business is in operation or when the
model homes or other developments are open for conducting business.
The proposed sign meets the square footage requirements of less than 25 square feet, and meets the
. yard requirements to be located on the ISD #192 property.
.
.
.
ACTION REQUESTED
Determine if St. Michael's incurs enough of a hardship to allow the installation of an off-premises
direction sign at the northeast intersection of Akin Road and CSAH 50. If a hardship is determined to
exist by the Planning Commission, approve the Conditional Use Permit with the following
contingencies:
1. The applicant obtains a sign permit prior to the installation of the sign.
2. The applicant coordinates with all small utility companies that may have services in the area
to ensure the placement of the sign is not affecting any of those services.
Respectfully submitted,
~.~r?~ .
~~
Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
Cc: St. Michael's Catholic Church
.
.
.
~~A
CITY OF FARl\1INGTON
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION
City of Farmington, 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
651-463-7111 FAX 651-463-1611
For office use
. Permit Number
Applicant Name (please print) (!/1r..Jj.f!.llf 0;:";,,(" ttr,i:;/.ktf..L
Applicant Address ;:<r9. /:;t.1J 061.J,.vtl4~'( frlll'f. r;"U!JHnv(r76tU, tthv
Phone_(?,5( ) (/!;;?~~3ebO ?(~.'l~ ~~~_( ~5( ) ~/;;'3 ~:1a33?
Legal Description o! Subject property. : ~lot, block.l,llat name, section, township, range).4
~c:>iJ,J&i!,S. ~l /1 tAJ\ >0 ~ oetVf/J/tt.~/ 1Itt:J/I) I!.b..J;; $ J& oo;..J$. n~:.'b
(~L"JKn)e;t.$.. or /..!r.A..JY -+')4-;;t{$-r/ HC-tHI >0 .:J:-~ ejJ:EfY1rOI\,). ~ ...
Current Land Use (!.(J/11MF..>J(Jl!A-l-. $c.H-/lDL)>/~'r:.,?-Current Zoning District
. Pl.! ',/J4re'
Specific Nature of Request: leitt4t4rUt~T f{;{;-/-Iu)!4-V ]);RlEr:.. T/tiNHl ,.~6?
>/(;...nJ5. -ro ..5-;- ulll:!.ffJ4.fL'..r: ~.1/4Ji.1!..# '
G'.>''' ;zt~
Zip Code
-----
Following Attached: (please check) _ Proof of Ownership _ Boundary/Lot Survey
_ Application fee _ 6 Copies of Site Plan
_ Abstract/Resident List *(required 350' from subject prope
_ Torrens (Owner's Dublicate Certificate 0 . Ie Required
Property Owner's Signature Applicant's Signature
Date Dat
For office use only
Request Submitted to Planning staff on
Public Hearing Set for.
Advertised in Local Newspaper:
, Planning CommissioD Action: _ Approved _ Denied
City' Council Action (if necessary): _Approved _ Denied
Comments:
. Conditions Set:
Planning Coordinator:
Date:
.
it
---\ ~
.
---.;.
I.
'...:.~
~,;::o,..,
~
II," i '
H..f'-
" 'Xi
~
Ie,
. .
.
ex · f3
"
~
;:::
II
-5
.S
OJ
B
ell
. ':.11\,'- _-- = ~I
t.~ r a~' 'f~-' _ L:&lf =-
, - ---I
\ dfJ ---
I, .I'f~.
,\"V<j, .
.f/{
I'
~
~~
o~
-0
-ON
~li
::d
5,a3
~~
~ 6
o ..,
.~ ~
';l~
5"
ex. c-
Farmington Independent School District 192
. ExceUence, Integrity, Innovation
DOUGLAS BONAR BUILDINGS & GROUNDS OFFICE
DIRECTOR .....' ..{iT. . ~ 'or fW.-' 421 W..J\LNUT STREET
l)..~4# e. :f>>'~~,?r!,M' l.. ~"FARMI~GT<:1N, MN 55024-1389
PHONE: (651) 463-5062
FAX: (651) 463-5041
October 10, 2005
Mr. John Frank, Parish Administrator
Church of St. Michael
22120 Denmark Avenue
Farmington, MN 55024
Dear Mr. Frank:
Your request for approval of the proposed signage on School District property is granted. Thank you for
your thoughtful consideration in this matter. I consider this action as a public service in providing a
location to convey directional information to visitors entering our community.
.
You are welcome to use this letter of endorsement in your Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Application
materials.
\~
glas L. Bonar
ctor of Buildings & Grounds
DLB/kjl
cc: Dr. Bradley Meeks, Superintendent
Dr. Christine Weymouth, FMS- W Principal
.
"AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER"
.
~
-::,- -
"'-J >
J ---..---
1 I 8
I ::.::F
""J
-10 >-- I -.J
l- I-!
1...1... wH '-J
"'" 0 <:::( _J i-j Z
- -1-.0 Z :::s
! :r. u -L ::s I 0
i c...J HI- L I u
I c::: L:.""'C ~
:::s
:r \. <...J 0 I 0
G rn 0 W
t, '-+-
0
~
- -
.
I' ------------
, ,1\ --1;3
--......J 'I <--...l
~Lw.,:>- I ---1
I '"-..J :z '-..J 1-- I I----j
:r- \--.j 1-\ I <--J
_ ,,-1 _I, ?~-
_C .'-...J a L --<
d ~ iO: :::; d
:::; <::( ~ <--.1
:r:: 'J Z
<-.J 1-: ()
if) .--.J
-
"""
-
i
1
<......)
<=-..-
o
:::::L
<-
~-::r- -
~
.
/
Ex. D
I
~
~
~
:::s
--.,
<::q
~
~
"'(
'0
"<
~.
t1
.
.
.
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
INTRODUCTION
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.d.farmington.mn.us
Planning Commission
Tony Wippler . \)(
Assistant City Planner ~ \)
1) Site Plan - Lot 2, Block 2, Farmington Business Park
2) Conditional Use Permit to allow an Auto Repair, Major Business in the B-3
zoning district
July 10, 2007
John Milde, on behalf of J- Tec Mgmt, LLC, has applied for site plan review as well as a conditional
use permit to allow, among other uses, an auto repair, major business to be located in the Farmington
Business Park. The Planning Commission reviewed the sketch plan for this project at its regular
meeting in June.
DISCUSSION
Site Plan Review
Per Section 10-6-23 of the City Code a site plan review is required for any construction of new
structures that mayor may not be in conjunction with site improvements on redevelopment site or
vacant undeveloped lands. The subject property is located in the Farmington Business Park south of
Canton Circle. The property is legally described as Lot 2, Block 2, Farmington Business Park.
The subject property is zoned B-3 (Heavy Business) PUD and has a comprehensive plan designation
of Commercial. The lot is approximately 195 feet wide by 544 feet in depth [2.49 acres]. (Exhibit A
- plat); (Exhibit B - site and landscape plan).
Proposed Uses
The applicant is looking to construct a multi-tenant building which would contain the following
proposed uses:
Tenant A:
Tenant B:
Tenant C:
Body Shop with office space (8,975 sf)
Landscape Company (approx. 1,925 sf)
Lease Space (9,400 sf)
.
.
.
It should be noted that a conditional use permit may be necessary for the use to ultimately occupy the
"lease space" area within the proposed building. A conditional use permit is required for the body
shop use being proposed in bay "A" as it falls under the definition of an auto repair, major business.
This specific conditional use permit will be discussed later in this memorandum.
Building Construction Materials
The elevations on the building shows integral colored concrete block on the base of the building and
pre-engineered metal is proposed for the upper portion of the exterior surface (Exhibit B). A pre-
finished metal roof is also proposed for the structure. It appears that the applicant is meeting the
design standards set forth in the PUD agreement that requires the exterior construction consists of
50% or more of brick, stone, concrete or masonry block.
Setbacks and Lot Coverage
The approved setbacks for the B-3 PUD are as follows:
Required setback
*20 foot front yard setback
*6 foot side yard setback
*6 foot side yard setback
Proposed setback
*68 foot front yard setback
*65 foot side yard (right side); 55 foot side yard
(left side)
*210 foot rear yard setback
The building depicted on the site plan exceeds all of the aforementioned setback requirements. Per
the Farmington Business Park Design Standards the square footage of all building footprints and
parking areas must not exceed sixty five percent (65%) of the total square footage of any building site
within the business park area. The combined paved and building area shown on the site plan is
68,844 square feet or 63.5% of the lot area.
Off-street Parking Standards
The site plan shows a total of 75 off-street parking stalls on site. The total parking required for the
uses were based on the following calculations:
Tenant A:
Total 8,975 square feet
1,200 sf of office @ 1 space per 250 sf = 5 stalls
8 bay shop @ 4 stalls per bay = 32 stalls
Tenant B:
Total 1,925 square feet
50% office / 963 sf @ 1/250 = 4 stalls
50% Industrial / 963 sf @ 1/600 = 2 stalls
TenantC:
Total 10,100 square feet
25% Office / 2,500 sf @ 1/250 = 10 stalls
75% Industrial / 7,600 sf@ 1/600 = 13 stalls
Of the 71 off-street parking spaces 31 stalls have been designated for outside vehicle storage. It
appears that the applicant is providing adequate parking space for the tenants. However, the Planning
.
.
.
Commission will have to determine if the intent of the parking code is not met with utilizing 31 of the
71 stalls for outside vehicle storage.
Outside Storage
Per the Design Standards approved with the PUD Agreement for the Business Park, no outside
storage areas shall be allowed without prior approval of the City. If outside storage is given city
approval, all materials and or containers and equipment shall be screened from view. The screening
must include: a) a six (6) to eight foot (8') high opaque wooden fence and landscaping; b)
landscaping and berms; or c) a combination of both to fully screen outdoor storage. The proposed
storage area mentioned above is screened by a 6 foot high wooden fence. This meets the screening
requirements identified above.
Trash Enclosure
The applicant is proposing two locations for trash enclosures on site. Both are located centrally on
site however, on opposite sides (east and west) of the proposed building. Per the approved Business
Park Design Standards, all trash containers must be screened by a six (6') foot masonry wall on three
sides of the trash unit. The current site plan shows wooden fence as the screening for the two trash
enclosures. The site plan will have to be revised to comply with the design standards mentioned
above.
Landscaping
The landscaping plan as shown in Exhibit B is generally acceptable to staff. However, staff will
recommend that additional screening in the form of landscaping be placed along the southern
boundary of the fenced in parking area.
Grading Plan
Attached as Exhibit C, is the site grading plan. The plan shows that a majority of the storm runoff
will flow south on site to a storm sewer pipe and then continue west into the pond servicing the
business park. Engineering is in the process of reviewing the grading plan. Staff is comfortable with
recommending approval of the site plan contingent upon engineering approval of the grading plan.
Conditional Use Permit
J-Tec Mgmt, LLC is requesting a conditional use permit for an auto body shop within the B-3 zoning
district as an auto repair, major business is a conditional use in the B-3 zone. The definition for auto
repair, major within the City Code is:
General repair, rebuilding or reconditioning of engines, motor vehicles or trailers, including
bodywork, framework, welding and major painting service.
The City Code provides criteria that must be satisfied for the Planning Commission to grant a
conditional use permit. Those criteria are:
1. The proposed use conforms to the district permitted and conditional use provisions and all
general regulations of this title.
.
.
.
2. The proposed use shall not involve any element or cause any conditions that may be
dangerous, injurious or noxious to any other property and persons and shall comply with the
performance standards listed below.
3. The proposed use shall be constructed, designed, sited, oriented and landscaped to produce
harmonious relationship of buildings and ground to adjacent buildings and properties.
4. The proposed use shall produce a total visual impression and environment which is consistent
with the environment of the neighborhood.
5. The proposed use shall organize vehicular access and parking to minimize traffic congestion
in the neighborhood.
6. The proposed use shall preserve the objectives of this title and shall be consistent with the
comprehensive plan.
City staff has reviewed the conditional use permit application and had determined that the request
meets all applicable City requirements for the CUP.
ACTION REQUESTED
1. Approve the site plan and conditional use permit subject to the following contingencies:
a. Approval ofthe grading plan by the Engineering Division.
b. Revising the landscape plan to include additional screening in the form of landscaping
along the southern boundary of the fenced in parking area.
c. Modify the site plan to show masonry block on three sides of all trash enclosures
instead of wood fencing.
Respectfully submitted,
~~
TO~iPPler, Assistant City Planner
Cc: John Milde, J-Tec Mgmt, LLC
I DRAWNG N~BER I
rwm~..;:..::~
G~~MB~I
I DRAWNG NUMBER I
&AfQJ~Br;"'~;;::-m"
.
~ ~; ~ 't
h ~! e I ;r _.~
----.,./ Z Iii II !lW==;=i=~ l!i.~~l ~ ; d!
· h i.:t
~I I 1 .......,... ""...."..
, '-'JlJI/'"MM3In.&I'G-...
, I
v--- M .9~,1I.00 N I "-
- '--~~--'
r- I
~ r ft ;\, 1_
~~: : 'v 0 ~1
!~ I ~.Io I' / -f c:/ .. ~~~~
~; Ii}:'" .) :; --\'.) ~ Ili~
;E :; d ~ l L-
ft.A ,r:~: l't ... ...~...:::.. - """1
~M ,:~l~~'_ ~-N----O--I-#-~.Ir.t~-iO.. ltt:tro~'-~""'3 ..... f -oOU1-
~I!I li" ____ li ' NCtN'te-. "',IIoIlO:-IZWI HW ,...~..~ 0_.- ~ .
; . ell to...l 101:K: ~ i!I unit :II
, I r : Loo~ I r eHlLH '311 JIJ 't/'" -1-coo~OE
I _JlJm.KJIJ~ I
,) ,: 2 II '--.uIf'I)O NO.lNY:) I I ::-CCW1S'Q..nL~~':DI": I I
~ II ~~~~~~ \ I
.c i I II ,,,..""'............-- I
iQ ,. >-11 wi I I
~ ,: III, :; I: :~" :~ I
~ ,% I I 01 I I I'
: I!! II II :/1
~~ I : ~-==___~ ~_=-==-=~..
1 .. III oo"tJ.t llt III OOlK 151
ill ft,'--:" ....'" .1. ~ s-1- ......
Ii 1~11 z ~ hi I 0/"",
i:, , 0 ..I~ \Y ..,
I a;~~ z v z
-t1- ~ t~' .~. +~
~I
;,
~ I W I
I u ___
g~ \
~ ~I \
I!I~~ I-- -x- 1l:'SL8'
~~i I N 0 I t U~tOolIOS "'::';,~~:... )
~~~ I ~ 1 d :3 J..........X""'............-~
'00 L $ :3 ~
Tbf~ 'w I e:-v~;v~3S~&)~~~ I
: Q r I I :
,_/ ___--1--__--1-____
~x,f1
I~:
.,
I
~!!
~
I!
-u I::
~
~ - "
% ~i ~
it "
....
I::
~
~
=
. "1.11oIlO N
Ill".
.
~
a::
<
Q.
(I)
(I)
l&J
Z
en
::)
m
z
~
"
z
:i
a::
~
"I
I \
I
I
~:
I
I
I
_______...J
...... ~
..
3 .Ql,l1.OO S
ZL
..
~
ill
"....
M ,.~,'a.oo N
~
2
~
s
III
~
~
~ ---,
~ t
~
~
~
$
r
r
~
s
~
~
,
I
D..-
LgOaK
"'-w:
.."'"
.. .tl,tOoOO N
<C
~
~
8
~
.
_""c-,.<4'~__
-""::-.<.:......:.._,..
.
z
[x' J3
.
~
;
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
C I ~
I
---------=-~-----------
I
I
I
.
~ I
, ()
I
.
,
I
I
I
-----------~-----------
I
.
.
I
I
I
I
.
.
I
c:: I ~
. :
H o::l
c. :::>
~ c
~ E >-
l'
" pi(
f
~ ~ f
~ '-'
.., ..... ....
"'...
~
f
l
t
f
t
"I
.
b
.
II
I
II 1
,
i
i! ~) @
..
~
I
}
i!l
~
.
l!l
I I i
I i
1, 1, 1{ w ~ .. 'I 'I 'I'll
i ~ ~ E ~ ~ g g I
I'
stU4'
.
ii
I
;;;
~ ~ s . c ~ ~ i ~
f f l I ~ I tis
i J I f I I ~ f ~
~[~'I I
8" I -
:, ::s
m~iirf(fl(
(li~Jl!i'
i Itf rP
I i
f i~l~ iill rzt
o t'l ~ ~ Q -;;,
C) ~~ . i!a ~
I--' ~"2 ~
ill
m~.w~-J
ill ~II i}!~r H J HI t' ~:[ [ ~II'
. ~ 'w. 1 ~ I} ~.~ ~ f '
--. ~ -. ! HI J A ~
~~~ ~;f Ejf Ii fIi! ~i ~
__ _~ 1 ~ Q ~..
~I! ~ .r ~ ., ,....H "00-
. , . , ,. ~. .- ~ Iii
=" -. ~. .. ~~~ ~ ~ i
.. H ti' H n." - -
I UiH I tJF~. 11 "
- flW t !( i~ ..; ~i n
f 'HP l~' II lIE ~~ ~
{ iP'lf i!li f u ~~ I
t 'il Hi- I-
"
I
I
.
b
-..,
~ II :: I ('IFI"I~$?\~~ :==-~~~~~~~i"~~=_~_':~~=_-=-_~~-='-=-~'~"O~'-'-~~_-=i_~-='-~-;~;.-~-=._- ~-'--~~~~I~I~lrl'\\ II~
II I 'I ' -- - - _~J__--_.__~~",_=:L. =.0:0'1 ~.. '.. . , "
111,111 '';=-+2"=:'=~~_':-~:-"l==-.--:~=''?\'\~\ f':! J111'!IJ ~
11/11111'1111 ftf(~-""'-"=-=;:m,,~;::::;:===-=~j-.,\\\\\\~ ~" *1"/1 Ii I.j:>-
111111111i1 1/11/1 ~ I' \\\\\ \\ <;. 11,111, co
I II! 1111\'111 1,1'1 1;, t.I\\\\\t\ ,~~, ___,~-_~-:::=:--':!!J0:liJ! I~
1/11111111111\ 111'111 i') I \\\,,\, ~-~--~'-~-~ii'='-=-~--~-::-=-=--~->~-;/ -:::::::_...:-_-.....:;::-;;/) ~
I I I I 'II ~ \, '--~..::.. - ______________, --=---/, ___'/,'
I :i:!I:!:I:::::II:\:!1 L"~~~::~=.~~~;;;;'~~:"'~~-.~,~ -
111:11:1'11:1111 \/1:11 \ /
III! /1111'1\ III \ I
11111:111 :111 111:11 \ I
I111 '11111' II I i' J
1'11111/11,11 lill \ ,/b,
I ,111111111\' 1/1\1 \ \, ,/ ': \\
I11I1111 \ 1,1\ 1I11 \ ,/ 1: \
II:I,:I,II:II!\ /1\:1 \\\~ ;
11'111 \\, III! J~" ':
I IIIII\I! I 1111 , '\ ,
IIII!I:\ II\!\ 1\1:1 --->>----->>-, 1-1--;
I 1'1 II I I \ I I \ I II' \ I ' : ~ I I 'i
1I1II1 I II ,) " I '" ' /, W ~
I I 'I I III! /, 11,1 I II ,
I \ ,I 11///1'//11/,1 / / \ I I ' \ ,,_^'_
I \ I1II1111 II f i 1/ 'J / \ : f'- I:
I I 111111111 / ,,'I f I I \ \ \ 'I ~'
I 1\ i 1111,1 I IT / / I I -\
' \ 111\\ III II ^
i 11,\\ ; i:\I\\:\1\\\'\~ 111\: I ( 1\ ~ \ \~ i' f I \1 ~i \
'i !lITI:1 JII:t'll 11:1 I k, i \ ll.\ \ ( \ 1 \ ;
, '! I 1111)1,111 III \ I, :
,1[1, " 1II1 ,I ..k , I, \
I! r TIIIi:I.I/it till I t ~: ~\ ;
I I \ Ilolllllllil ,'\ \ :
/) I' \ 11(llill/[1 1\\ :1")
I I 1IIIIIiliIJ I I~:\ ;l>
{ \ IIIIII\T'\I\ III 'f .-:~
/ \ \ IIIII]I\'I I 'I N " ~o
' \,! II'IIIII~I 1)\' ':! ,~
\ I :\1111,11 ,II/ ' i2
' 1,1, II 'V
, "1111'111 ill :p
/ 1 I II 1111 Ii'" ;101
I ! i\ llll~ II:! / !1 11 I:":
\ \ 1111::~\II\i' ,I; ~ __ !
\' I I I ^ \ 1 I II ~ 1,-
: 1\1:1::1111 11/ :
I' : IIIIIII:~ 11:1 : il
, I: li: ~ \! ;': :; I , l J \j
:: I, II I III iTi.J;:1 III I; / i ,L i
_,,\I'!'11 111//"1111 ~I:III ! l : \ ~:
-11,\ I 111111I1I Ii; I, \ '. :'
'1111111 11111I111 ill/II \ \ _,,_
I ! I, "II 1 1I1II1 III IT,I I i I.
IIII'III"I! I1I1111I11 II~III I --,i,--
I ~ i _I I "I, 011 "I , / I"
"
11
':
\1
,
"
\1
,
"
It
,
"
11
,
" '-- @ "e~
'~~i ~ ~.~~ c:
"iiiI ..... " ~In ~ :z: f;l 6 f.
:i5> @ '" ~~~ i~~~ Ini1I
~ " ~
:lliJ ~;~ ~.~~ ):E~~ ~
~ n '.., 00 =
~ n Ci" ... .I'd N h. "
~ ~ g~i ~~;~ ~g'i c:; r3 i ;!
= i ,~I l<>
"iaI=l I~i ~ir ~~~~ ~ ~~~E] t~ ii!~ F ~.
:i5>/&ll , ~ ,; .. CI" ...,8; _
:lliJ~ ~ II: I UP ~" ~t"~ :~l~ ~.e:
~m !m~~
t&;;: tTl ~~i~ h r~~~ ~ ~
fI#I; ~ ~;I e_~ I tri I~~O!~
~ ~~. o .
h. ~i1i ~". 1'[ 8~G ~~
i . -~
~X,L
.
.
I' I I I I
: I I : : :
Sic ~I ~ r I ~ ~
~ T I ' I ,i'i
: I I I I I I I
hUH ; i & II hi i I;; I II ~
~ ~ <'~~ D
III 111111111 ~
\ \ Ii i i i i ii i i ll~
I
\
I
\
"-
',,---
I
J
/"
/
~
~I
fi!!il
~~ ~~ ~
b I; I
~
~
i
~
Q
I
1
. ,~J
=,~.-- -=--=-=='-==..--=--=--==r--'ll
i I
I
V)
'"
9..
,
"
-..../
~~
Pi ~
. ~ ~ i ~
x ~ ~
r ~
8 "@ ~ ~ ~
1!:ill:lliJ
2QJ~
C") ~il .. !
~~ ~
W ~ ~
. 1!:ill2QI
..... "i1l=(
!;fI#I;
~~
Iiil
~ ~
~ i
~
:g
"
.
.
.
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463.7111 Fax (651) 463.2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO:
Planning Commission
Tony Wippler 19J!v
Assistant City Planner - D
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Amendment to the Farmington Business Park PUD Agreement as it pertains to
the design standards for screening
DATE:
July 10, 2007
INTRODUCTION
The City entered into a Planned Unit Development [PUD] Agreement with Colin Garvey on March 7,
2005 as part of the overall development plan for the Farmington Business Park. Approved as part of
the PUD Agreement were certain design standards, including screening, that all new construction
within the Business Park would have to meet.
At the June 12,2007 regular Planning Commission meeting the Commission reviewed a sketch plan
for a potential construction project within the Business Park. The proposal included an area marked
as "Outside Vehicle Storage" which if allowed by the Planning Commission would require opaque
screening in the form of a wooden fence.
DISCUSSION
The current language within the Design Standards regarding screening for storage areas is as follows:
1. Storage Areas: Without prior approval of the city, no outside storage areas shall be
allowed nor shall any articles, goods, materials, incinerators, storage tanks, refuse
containers or like equipment be kept in the open or exposed to public view or view from
adjacent buildings. If outside storage is given city approval, all materials and or
containers and equipment shall be screened from view. Required screening shall include:
a) a six (6') to eight foot (8') high opaque wooden ftnce and landscaping; b)landscaping
and berms; or c)a combination of both to fully screen the outdoor storage.
A question arose during the aforementioned sketch plan review at the last Planning Commission
meeting regarding the necessity of installing only wooden fencing to meet the 100 percent opaque
screening requirement. There are a number of ways in which to make other fencing, such as chain
link fencing, opaque whether it is by utilizing slats or a mesh covering. The question was brought up
due in large part to the long term maintenance that is required with wood fencing versus chain link.
The Planning Commission instructed staff to review the standards identified above and possibly come
back at the July meeting with a proposed amendment to the PUD Agreement.
.
.
.
Staff is suggesting that the section of the design standards referenced above be modified as follows,
the proposed changes are underlined:
1. Storage Areas: Without prior approval of the city, no outside storage areas shall be
allowed nor shall any articles, goods, materials, incinerators, storage tanks, refuse
containers or like equipment be kept in the open or exposed to public view or view from
adjacent buildings. If outside storage is given city approval, all materials and or
containers and equipment shall be screened from view. Required screening shall include:
a) a six (6') to eight foot (8') high opaque wooden or chain link fence and landscaping. If
chain link fencing is desired. slats and or mesh in the color of black shall be installed on
the fence to create 100% ol>acity.
Staff has discussed this amendment with Mr. Colin Garvey, the developer of the Farmington
Business Park, and he indicated that he is okay with the proposed changes.
ACTION REQUESTED
Approve the proposed amendment to the Farmington Business Park PUD Design Standards and
forward that recommendation onto the City Council.
Respectfully submitted,
~~
Tony Wippler, Assistant City Planner
Cc: Colin Garvey
.
.
.
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463.2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO:
Planning Commission
FROM:
:kl
r
Tony Wippler \. .'~, _'
Assistant City Planner '
SUBJECT:
1) Site Plan - Lot 3, Block I, Farmington Industrial Park 20Sth Street Addition
2) Conditional Use Permit to allow a Bus and Truck Terminal in the IP zoning district
DATE:
July 10,2007
INTRODUCTION
Patrick Regan, on behalf of POR-MKR Real Estate, LLC, has applied for site plan review as well as a
conditional use permit to allow a Bus and Truck Terminal in the Farmington Industrial Park (IP zoning
district).
DISCUSSION
Site Plan Review
Per Section 10-6-3 of the City Code a site plan review is required for any construction of new structures that
mayor may not be in conjunction with site improvements on redevelopment site or vacant undeveloped lands.
The subject property is located in the Farmington Industrial Park off of 20Sth Street and north of Just Kidding
Around Daycare & Preschool. The property is legally described as Lot 3, Block 1, Farmington Industrial Park
20Sth Street Addition.
The subject property is zoned IP (Industrial Park) and has a comprehensive plan designation of Industrial. The
lot is an irregular shaped lot that consists of approximately 3.45 acres of land (Exhibit A - plat); (Exhibit B -
site plan and details).
Phase I
The applicant is proposing a multi-phased development. The initial phase would consist of 1 - 12,600 square
foot building which would be relocated from its current location on the "old Marschall Bus Garage property"
located east of TH 3. The applicant is proposing to dismantle the building at its current location and then
transport its pieces to the new site. By doing this, a special exception permit for moving a structure within the
City is not required. The building and parking lot will be situated in the very rear of the lot. The access to
this parcel will come from 20Sth Street via a "bituminous drive" that bi-sects the parcels and terminates at the
parking lot. On the north and south sides of the bituminous drive are areas that are identified as "recycled
bituminous parking" areas. The recycled bituminous is similar in nature to compacted gravel. These areas are
proposed as such as the applicant is proposing to park buses within these areas. In addition, these areas are
proposed to be constructed as part of the phase II development that will be discussed later in this
memorandum. By utilizing the recycled bituminous it allows the applicant to utilize these areas as temporary
bus parking while in the future allowing the applicant to easily remove the material when ready to start
construction for phase II.
. The initial building would be used as a bus and truck terminal which is a conditional use under the IP zoning
ordinance. This specific conditional use permit will be discussed later in this memorandum. The overall site
plan for phase I is shown on sheet AI-l of Exhibit B.
Building Construction Materials
The elevations on the building shows a fiber cement siding on the side elevations with a pre-finished metal
roof. Section 10-6-20 (Industrial Park Design Standards) of the City Code states that exterior walls of
buildings to be constructed shall consist of one or more of the following materials and shall receive prior
approval by the city:
(a) Brick: Size, type, texture, color and placement shall be approved.
(b) Stone: Stone shall have a weathered face or shall be polished, fluted or broken face.
(c) Concrete Masonry Block: Concrete masonry block shall be those generally described as
"customized architectural concrete masonry units" or shall be broken faced brick type units with
marble aggregate. All concrete masonry units shall be coated with a city approved coating. There
shall be no exposed concrete block on the exterior of any building unless approved by the city.
(d) Concrete: Concrete may be poured in place, tilt up or precast; and shall be finished in stone,
textured or coated, with a minimum life expectancy often (10) years.
.
It appears that the applicant is meeting the intent of the Industrial Park Design Standards as they pertain to the
construction materials for the exterior walls.
Setbacks and Lot Coverage
The approved setbacks for the IP zoning district are as follows:
Required setback
*50 foot front yard setback
*25 foot side yard setback
*25 foot side yard setback
Proposed setback
*270+ front yard setback
*25 foot side yard (right side); 58 foot side yard
(left side)
*83 foot rear yard setback
The building layout as proposed in phase I (sheet AI-I) meets or exceeds all of the aforementioned setback
requirements. Per the Industrial Park Design Standards the ratio of building square footage and parking area
shall not exceed sixty five percent (65%) of the total square footage of any building site within the affected
property. It appears that meeting this requirement will not be an issue. With the completion of phase II, the
total impervious space that will cover the site is 62.43%.
Centered along the southern boundary of the subject parcel is a 100 foot wide gas pipeline easement. The
proposed site plan shows a portion of the parking lot encroaching into that gas easement. The applicant will
have to obtain an encroachment agreement from the gas company and submit a copy of the agreement to the
City in order to construct within the easement area. This will be made a contingency to the approval of the site
plan.
. Off-street Parking Standards
Phase I shows a total of 12 off-street parking stalls being provided. The Industrial Park Design Standards
require that 1 stall be provided for every 2,000 square feet of floor area for warehouse/storage uses. The total
parking spaces required based on the code provisions is 6 (12,600/2,000).
. The main parking lot in front of the building will have concrete curb and gutter. In addition, the entrance of
the bituminous drive will have concrete curb and gutter. The areas labeled as "Recyclable Bituminous
Parking" are proposed to have bituminous curb as it will likely have to be removed at a later date with the
phase II construction.
Trash Enclosure
According to the site plan, the trash will be contained within the building. No outside storage is planned at this
time. The sanitation supervisor has reviewed the location of the trash and has determined it as acceptable.
Landscaping
The landscaping depicted in sheet Al-l of Exhibit B is generally acceptable to staff. The adjacent property to
the north is heavily wooded along its southern property line and provides a natural screen for the residential
properties located north in Middle Creek. Staff is comfortable with the amount of additional screening the
applicant is providing along the northern boundary of the subject property.
Grading Plan
Attached as sheet C-2 of Exhibit B is the grading, drainage, and utility plan. The Engineering Division is in
the process of reviewing this document. Approval of the site plan will be contingent upon Engineering
approval of the drainage and utility plan.
.
Phase II Construction
At this time, the applicant does not have a time frame for starting phase II ofthis project. The full development
site plan is shown on the attached sheet labeled AI-2 of Exhibit B. The second phase is proposed to consist of
two additional buildings (12,096 SF and 10,500 SF in size). These two buildings will be located within the
areas that are labeled "Recycled Bituminous Parking" on the initial site plan as presented. The applicant
would eventually like to condo-out the buildings to various tenants. It should be noted that the uses within
these buildings will have to meet the uses outlined in the IP code as either permitted or conditional. These
buildings will also have to meet the standards set forth in the IP Design Standards. Attached is a copy of the
IP code for reference (Exhibit C). Additionally, more off-street parking (20 stalls) will be located on the east
side of the site, bringing the total off-street parking at build out to 32 stalls. The applicant is showing a future
connection to Eastview Avenue. At this time, this roadway is not constructed as the alignment for this road is
off the applicant's property. Once Eastview Avenue is constructed and the connection from this property is
made to Eastview Ave., the access to 20gth Street that is shown on the initial site plan should be closed as the
spacing would be too close. The last significant change that is made with phase II is that the original parking
lot will be extended around the building to be relocated on site with phase I. This would allow access to the
rear of the building.
It should be noted that Phase II will return to the Planning Commission as a site plan if or when the applicant
is ready to proceed with that phase.
Conditional Use Permit
.
Patrick Regan is requesting a conditional use permit for a truck and bus terminal within the IP zoning district.
The initial building to be relocated on site will be utilized for storage and repair and maintenance of buses
owned by Marschall Bus Lines. In addition, as previously mentioned, there will be outside storage of buses on
site as well. The definition of a bus and truck terminal is as follows:
-BUS TERMINAL: Any structure or land devoted principally to servicing, fueling, repair, storage, or leasing
or passenger buses
. -TRUCK TERMINAL: Any structure or land devoted principally to the receipt, transfer, short term storage,
and dispatching of goods transported by truck.
The City Code provides criteria that must be satisfied for the Planning Commission to grant a conditional use
permit. Those criteria are:
1. The proposed use conforms to the district's permitted and conditional use provisions and all general
regulations of this title.
2. The proposed use shall not involve any element or cause any conditions that may be dangerous,
injurious or noxious to any other property and persons and shall comply with the performance
standards listed below.
3. The proposed use shall be constructed, designed, sited, oriented and landscaped to produce
harmonious relationship of buildings and ground to adjacent buildings and properties.
4. The proposed use shall produce a total visual impression and environment which is consistent with the
environment of the neighborhood.
5. The proposed use shall organize vehicular access and parking to minimize traffic congestion in the
neighborhood.
6. The proposed use shall preserve the objectives of this title and shall be consistent with the
comprehensive plan.
City staff has reviewed the conditional use permit application and had determined that the request meets all
applicable City requirements for the CUP.
.
ACTION REQUESTED
Approve the site plan and conditional use permit subject to the following contingencies:
1. Approval of the grading and utility plan by the Engineering Division.
2. The applicant obtaining an encroachment agreement with the gas company for constructing a parking
area within their easement.
Respectfully submitted,
-...
I~
To:;J;iPPler, Assistant City Planner
Cc: Patrick Regan
.
~h
II_
I ;
Hi
'\'
fi!
Iii
-it!
II!
-3I\V NDJ.V3' hi
\. HI
I
I
~
I
I
I
.
~~
E~
~9
~~
or ;l~ le!
i ~~ ~
~~ ~~ - ~ ~ ;
~. 9~ ~ ~ ~ t
i~ ~~ ~ L~ ~:
~ M g~ ~. ~~m . g
~I ~. tg. !. ~ ~~~ ~ ~
it; lli~~ !!, ~ .... I, li r:l
~~ iE~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~
i :~~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ E~2i ~ 9 : ~
~ ~~I 11: ~ :ti' ;
;;; ~...
~
~ dB ll< ~
~. %~ ~ ~
,~ ~~ ~d Ii ~
z~~<. "
:~~~;H ~ ~
~ .'~~~H ~ ~
~ lilj.J"-"
I'.idl\
n~~'~u r ~
~I
~;
-l
~~
~8
~,;
~l
I ~j
~t
~ i~
~ iil
/z
----./
, ~
H
H
II
J
Iili ,/
!" "./"
~I~" ",,"
-----... /'
t-->-s.N' ./
-'\- -/ \
\.
\. \.
.
()
!j
~!
"
~~
"
~
;/
~
"
~
~
:i
1!
.
'ix, t3
%
>- >-
~ ~
'" '"
~ ~
~a~
~~~
() !3
;;: 0
r= "-
f5 ~
u
(/)
~
~
0::
Z;:) .1
o(/) .~
~o'd S;
8 (/) ~~
<0::
"'w
ILl g
~ ;
~ ~
ILl
.
~/z
~
~d
~h
."
g.s~
I..m
~ I!;
~~~
t~.s
ii:i:go
f i~i
.
~
~
"
~1
.
I ~
. a
. I
L
n
, I
. .
~ ~ ~
~ ~;: ~ ~ . ~; ~.
w ~! :< i! ~ cl ~ ~ 5~
~~~~~~'d 8 ~ K 8 ~~
~ ~. ~ > > >. 5.
; J~~;~n ~ ~ I ~ Ii
f ..
U~~~>.:d 1 ~ ~ 1
1H . ~ ti r '$\ -.
f
~x.B
>'
i ~
o ~
~, " I i
.:;;~ .; ,,~ .d
- :; .
~~ ~ g~ ~ ~ ~
, " .' i' II I!.
, , _..' "Ie" !,'
I'''' · ! lJ'! ..,,!!, <t I
~~ ~~ :? ~ >' ~ " ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ 3" !l oi' 2. 3
>' ~'" l f ~ ~ . ~ ~ m ~ ~ 8 ~~ ~ ~ ~ I' ~
<iil" .. d " l ' " '. q !" ,: ;
~ ~~ ~5 ~" II! f,( Q II " m ili i . ~ ~ ~~ . ~~ 0 ~ ~
o >d.' ~. ~> . "~~ ~ ~. ~ 0 0 .., ~ E !' ~
, " :;, ,,:" ; I " " ' !,' . ! ; '! ,II ,"
'. '.'" C' . _ . . " ! ",' . · , ,. · '" II.
; Iii! Iii; Ii! I ~ ! ; !: nil ill:l !! i
! .." .., . . . . .. ., .,. ,,"I "
,Iii II I : ! w ad n I ii I ~;n d
_ "" ;;; -; ~ : ~ ~ ~ 8 ! ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ID~ ~ ~~~ 5 i ~
..;?;; .??3 ;;; -;.: ::d l<in h
--~~~ ~~ ~~~
'\
'\
u
~ .
i~:
E<O
g..g:i
!5~
Cld .i
f~~
<('0/.3
Ul i
~ .
~ !
zit:
o::l
Ul Ul ii
~<Id S'
~~ d
-:>ILI
~ g
<3 .
Z
ILl
i:
.
f
ltt
!Ij
IfJ
III
I.
L
i:
J; "
\:1 I) ,I
I ~ ' II
,I Itl I! I;
it I, !!
~I
I G, gi. ~!1
;~; dB In
h"d ...,
k ~~~ k
Jli ... f
iii
~ I ti
I) ~~ ~ I~
(D~ ~mm E:lIt ~
L ~
.
i:
I
, I I-
1 in I ,~
. .h. It'll'. ...
1 ft~ .. ~ b
ii I " t J Ul
ii fJ~1 l,"lll ~
I. iu~ ~ IS:
. II.
J. ~ I ~ i
I
.J
I ..hj,
It .1 fj'. Ii J
ill !bJ!~i i!l. i!
n. IJ;f~:1 ~ .f
~! $H! JlIJJc!t 19 ~
Ii ....
<:'0 .. .
il .... . ~
I!....
L
i:
.
L
i:
I ~ I
. i "
I~I I :1 1 ~ ~
11-jt" i. f ~ in g
I ~ n · ~II I
~ F. ~l . . ". ~ q
111 ~!I ~ i Ii: Im~ Ii
:. f J HIlI J lit .;1:1, Ht I
~1, · Ii; ')91" J'I
J !.11i;til Ii
~ L
.J
i: I
Uf Iii?
J. u!!. ;;Ip,.~ ~~. I 1~1;;! b , r ~
It t ~~JJJI 1,1,1 hIt! J. f) I.: 9 ...
II i ~91 'i": '{ i;t J I' II:; ~ 15
I. It~~! ~" 1~!HJ1 f :la!' "I~ i
n J!~~!~~ lIit! ill !n J! Ijl~! ~! S ; i
e\.' s~
~ '.' ~ ~ i
~- I W I
. .. ~
L
.J
L
I
I I II
ft1 I I ~
~Jg ~
hftli ~
I!~ ; :
~1I s ~
-I~ : ..~:, I IIi
.. ~:.~ ..; ~ I
.J
1 -, I, '
1111 ., jl~H J ~ !!
il, I' ~l~ !iJjl J!! i! ~i u
n. 1~I'flll fl.. .t ". h
m ! It Ui!t I!I ~ :1
I
I I ~
~'.-'.' !'~
.",!-'.';: I~:' I ~
. . - '.!; g
~ . q "II ~
~ ~ ~ I~
!i l~j~ lMJ~! .,. '1'1
i~iI{!m!:i!;~!: ~ Ill!
~ L .J
[x, 8
~~z
~~~
~g:z
Ul-'O
"'I-
","'0
"'0Z
~z:i
1-",
"'9<
0-....
a..::>
CD
Ul
-'
~
'"
CI
I!!
in
U
5.
-d
E<
~~
!ti
"15
f~
Q..
<N
(I) i
~ ~
!!;! !
zlk:
gij! ii
~.I(! P
0(1) !i~
<lk: .~
-'.....
..... !
Z .
G f
i3 I
~
II! II i
iil ~ ~
.1
'.c-
ti'
ill
al
~H
HI
m j :
. !.
h il ~. ~
L ~ ~
fh~n
r:
.
L
I:
.
L
I:
1.1
hn
II..
IUD
~ i
~d~~!
I ~::~
,..:1
.2QI_
1
i==;S
,,"_~4
L
r:
.
L
It
J'11
,I ~I
ah!
illl
.. ".1.
I
~
11'
.t1/J1
itllr..
J~ j!~1
i .
j !II
I I J,
f , l!i
;:<;
I i
II i
S :;; I
~ i
~I
-.l
.0 I
, I
d
g
l:J
I! I
t
.,
If
-.J
-.J
.1$)
; ~ lij~l
I I mi~
i! in
I:
." it
~I nt' fl, --
11 ~n! m~1
~.....
:. :,: :,.:.~I'
iI
1'1
!f
iil
1..
t &~ .
I,
If
. -I
II Ii I" A
i. t f t;;
IJ IJ ;:<;
Ii ,Ii I! !
;~; I~!
~ I
I
-.J
j Q I
i I I
I ! d
11 <
~. ~ i!:i Ii i
~] ~ :.~. ~~ il ; i
,; 'f ~~I
. . ~ t
J!ii ~'" FA I
li~, ~
L
~~~
<.
~l1:t::"
~lt:1II
,,~~
~~:
I~i
~~~
~~:
i'<!C
d!
i~W
~;~
aliJ3i
~~~
I~g" ~~ i ~ i~~
"~ ~ ~I "~~ 5 a~i
~~~. ~~ ".. Q ~5~
2r8 i Q~ ~ a~ ~ a ~
~~i ~ ~: ~ ~~ ~ :~~
<!~ ~ ~!~ ~~:;; · ~5~~
~5~ ~ .~, ~.~ ~'.g
5Q~' ~~W. wi~ ~ ~~~~
c~~ ~ ~~~ ~ I ~ ~& ~
~gs ~ ~~~. . "im"~
Sa:z... ~F ~ ~~ ~ t1~
~~~ ~g ~~~ i ~~ ~ g~~~
,~ c~ .~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~~
~g~ ~~ ~o~ ~ ~lt 8 ~15~~
~W~ ~~ ~il ~ ~i0 ~ ~~~~
~~~ ~~ ~~c · ~.~ . ~~~~
".~ u. f"O S ~~ ~ ~u.Q
i~i ~~ ~I~ i ~!~ i ~I~~
~ c t ~ ~ ~ ~
i -
, .
II
, Ili
fx,(j
wts
ClFZ
<(<(:2
l!ig "
t;d~
a::"'Cl
><",z
:2z';i
'9'"
~3~
!Xl
lJ)
...J
~
W
Cl
~
iii
"
E~
i!
~o
Jg
,'l~
I~
<N
(f) ~
~ ~
~ !
zit:
~~ ij
m~ p
8 (f) 51
~ffi .
~ !
(5 ,
z i
w to
-.J
ill J I
IJ: I !
jfl
.1
~ 5'&
p~
i;l
:d
In
hi
m i ~
. I.
I n ~ . f
i .. ~ . D
lldH
z,: (3
:~~:j;'~
--................,
f:LlC-"flo-/:U 'XY>I 'lL1l-."'-lH>'MJ
~I<on Nil 'l!I,'IJ\;i,.'t" "''''''' "Q'f'Ma~., 'u.'1t
I 3SVHd _ NV,d 3llS .ON' 'lN3Wd013A30 O<!ldd"t
><055 N".t;f~?SN~~~1 NOl~YJ01.~ !1N101Il9 .'mIOiS nll-~Od
.~Od J.:::J3rO~d a3S0dO~d
,
g I
it I <t
.
LO/~O/LO
'V'W"
OV'
BV';>
-- -........
"""'_11-
____1--------:
I
!
I
!
I
I
:
I
uJ
lJ)
<(
:r
II
:r
r 0
f-
f uJ
'>l
lJ)
uJ
" f-
0 iii
<
~
.
/ 0
/ :
/
/ ~
/ . <
/ :.. ~
f gi ~
I ~~ g
I 9 :i~ ~
/ k LII. l!i
I 0 ~:~
'. ~.... r
/ z ~a o~
f Q 8 "
/ ~ ~ ;? ~r!
/ ~ ~~ I u i ; I' ~i ~
II ~ ~!<(i.lbl~; ~e~
I ~ ~<fiC5t-~t-~II.=!~
/ Ul ~~C ~= >, ~ . U i
/ ~~~~dl~I~lpai~
/
/
/
I
//
( /'
r
I
i
/
/
/
"
. L
iii
i t-
, ~ H
~ . . ~
I
~
~, ~ ~
< o~~~~~~
~ II r i (; ~r~ :a
~a ~ t 0 Z2~~8~
j 8 2 ~~nn
-o.! ~~~~l28.
~::r :r...La.iI~::l
E:....o;l ~ ...oY.a..~...
g;~=9111~:!ii=~~~
~! ~3 I:i ~5 :~ ~ a ~~ 9 ~ 5
lUi::!:; ~ ~c:'~ !( ~ !J S...... rJ >
~i ~~ ~nnn~ ~ ~~! ~ i ~
1\)11 ~" ~3 t" ~.. ..- i ~31- ~ t- .
~a..tll~.~lllj';j t3~i;e.
,~ i~ ~~ s~ ~a s~ I! ~t~..! =~
ao.....::J:....ofI...-l. ~.~...;....l
~ Ill' :(: :a: ~: .': ~.. !i ~~~ Ii ~ ~~
:-:r.... 2C ~~ DC VII e dill: iU 0. 0 .~
~l jg ~~ g9 l5 ~ ~~ ;; ~ ~ f~
:f -.iJII II.~~ LlI~~~,~I~gf
oil := = :=i:til==g~
.
E
I
Iii ~
~ E Q
~ & ~
w 8 i Ii
~ ~ ~~~
~O~~
.....; .......
i
I
.5 D l' ~
g ~ i
< ~ 0 .
D~=81
ffi ~ ~ ~
"
"J
~ i I
~! I ~
Jz ~ :f ,. g.
'" < .S e
~ 8 ~ " ~
R
~ ... DUO
o ..
.~
H
n~ !
g a = i
2 ~e =,
!~
~,. ~
~ : ~ ~
~ 2~ ~
j!!! I' ~~
~ ~ ~ ,..
cia ~~ ~
~ ~~ ~
~~ ~
C j~
- ~
... ~
g
8
Q
I z
0
i=
2 <(
. >
~ Ulb
..J ,
Ul ~
f- ~
~~
Ul M
z
o
i=
<(
>
1U
-I b
1U <
:r .
f- ,
iH
<I) ~
~ ~
~ .
! i
. ft
~ .
. .
I r
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I '
---------:!.---------------------------------f
I '
II ..- I'
~..
I ~~
/ ~~
/:~L \:
~ .~~~~
;~~~ ~
.... .
::;: :
.(.(.(.(.(
.
lO/tO/tO
"V'I.n
::>"'r
"''''?
- --..
"""_'11-
~i~
.tOSS N.W 'N01?NIj.j~'o'.::l
133~lS 1.\1801:
.
.
/' ./
(' /
:/
r
I
I
I
Il
\
tX,D
t:LI!:-..n~U" '~..." 'lll,-..n~ts.. 'Hol
..059 N'" 'iI"v.!l)l"" "!IA'" ...aYM.II'> 'ft.loolll:
. N
.1 I ...!...
'0 <(
.!N3JJd013A30 "nd,
J.QnlS ii,LIS
.0"' .~""W"01,,^"a OC!lddV'
NOLL If.)O'.~ ?NICI1I1lll .?VlIO!S ~lIll-lIOd
'l!IO.l J.:)3tOl!ld 03S0dOl!ld
1
1
1 1 '
--+~
1 '
/1 I
/ I
1 ,
1/ I
1
1
1
1
1
iEB
- "
.
N
ill
cJl
<l:
I
n.
.1.. .
WWWWf-
uuoo 0
:::: ~
1.01.01111,1]111
zzzm IIf
:mmla ~
3~~~ 51
~w ~
~~ ~
....~ ....
C> C>
.. ..
~ ~
~ ~
ill
I-
in
.
.
.
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463.7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO:
Planning Commission
TonyWippler r 9V
Assistant City Planner v~ 0
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Michael Bischel Sketch Plan - 808 2nd Street
DATE:
July 10, 2007
INTRODUCTION
The applicant, Michael Bischel, has submitted a sketch plan (Exhibit A) for the property addressed as
80820 Street. The applicant is proposing 1 single-family lot and 2 two-family lots in the R-2 Zoning
District (Exhibit B).
DISCUSSION
The applicant is proposing 1 single-family lot and 2 two-family lots on 0.76 acres (33,035 square
feet).
Before a preliminary plat is submitted for review, a sketch plan review is required at the Planning
Commission. It should be noted that comments by the Planning Commission are intended to be
advisory in nature and do not constitute a binding decision on the sketch plan.
Existing Conditions (Exhibit A2)
The lot consists of 0.76 acres of land (33,035 square feet). The property contains an existing tri-plex
that was built in 1880. In addition, there is an approximately 600 square foot accessory building
located on site as well. Both of the buildings currently located on site are proposed to be demolished.
The subject property and all adjacent properties are zoned R-2, Low/Medium Density Residential.
Adjacent to the north are two existing duplexes, the SOO line railroad is located to west and single-
family residential is located to the south and east of this property.
Proposed Lot Sizes and Widths
The proposed lots are located in the R-2 Zoning District, which requires a minimum lot size of 6,000
square feet and a minimum lot width of 60 feet for single-family lots and 11,000 square feet and a
minimum lot width of75 feet for two-family lots. The lot sizes and widths are proposed as follows:
Lot
Lot 1
Lot 2
Lot Size
6,000 SF
11,009 SF
Lot Widths
73.65 feet
157.09 feet
.
.
.
Lot 3
11,007 SF
83.88 feet
All of the lot sizes and widths meet the minimum standards ofthe R-2 Zoning District.
Access
The applicant is proposing to access the 2 two-family lots off of a 22 foot wide private street that
would need to be outlotted in a plat. The proposed private street consists of the northern 22 feet of
the subject property. Twenty-two (22') feet is the minimum width that is allowed for private streets.
The proposed private street is 230.25 feet in length thereby requiring a turnaround for emergency
purposes. The turnaround being proposed encompasses the northeast comer of Lot 3 and a small
portion of the northwest comer of Lot 2. The turnaround as proposed would encroach into two side
drainage and utility easements that would be required to be dedicated as part of a plat. Per Section
11-4-4 (D) this would not be allowed. The applicant has stated that he would be willing to pipe both
of the affected drainage and utility easements to make the drainage work.
Engineering
Additional review will be required by the Engineering Division to ensure that drainage will work
with this proposed development and will not adversely affect the surrounding properties.
A grading and drainage plan will have to be submitted for review and approval by the Engineering
Division.
ACTION REQUESTED
The Planning Commission should comment on the concept plan.
Respectfully submitted,
I~
TO~iPPler, Assistant City Planner
Cc: Michael Bischel
.
.
.
.8/2007 09: 213
9524352929
BRANDT ENG SURVEYING
J \' J
/--. - - - - - ~- ~ - r - - - - l
I I I
I I I
I I I 35
I \'11 -Z "\ N 89'42>36.1 w I b
2 <".f::o
'-....
100.98
~
, 7.09 III
----I
~
..
~lD
""
...
7$..02
302.47
J\I p,Q"4.?',f\" W
PAGE 02/02
. ~X,111
W
0(',/
OAV
"(',/
~!')
.....0
o
z
JS.
2007 BUILDING INFORMATION (PAYABLE 2008):
TYPE TRIPLEX
YEAR BUILT 1880
ARCH/STYLE TWO STORY
FOUNDATION SO FT 1469
FINISHED SO FT 2445
BEDROOMS 5
BATHS 3
FRAME WOOD
GARAGE SO FT 600
OTHER GARAGE
MISC BLDG
,-;;:;mm
(,(~-
if
II
II
I,
Ii
II
Ii
Ii 'I
rll
!I
!I
.~ !rl=.:--
Ii I,
..III'1\~ II
I ,I
I, I!
i, 'I
Ij J,
./ Ii
I'
"
II
[1===
i!
II
ii
II
!I
it
II
SITE MAP
PROPERTY 10 NUMBER: 14-O3100-O10~59
2007 ESTIMATED MARKET VALUES (PAYABLE 2008)
.NER:
71,300
143,000
214,300
192
LOT SIZE (EXCLUDES
ROAD EASEMENTS)
33,035 SO FT
0.76 ACRES
BISCHEL-SPERLING LLC
808 2ND ST
FARMINGTON MN 55024
808 2ND ST
FARMINGTON MN 55024
LAND:
BUILDING:
TOTAL:
SCHOOL DISTRICT:
PROPERTY ADDRESS:
LOCATION:
SE1/4 SW1/4 SECTION 31-114-19
PAYABLE 2007 TAXES
NET TAX:
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS:
TOTAL TAX & SA
3,183.50
56.62
3,240.12
PAYABLE 2008 HOMESTEAD STATUS: NON HOMESTEAD
WATERSHED DISTRICT: VERMILLION RIVER
LAST OUALlFIED SALE:
DATE: 812004 AMOUNT: 165,000
PAYABLE 2008 ASMNT USAGE:RESIDENTIAL
i!
/.1
.....................::::... _:';.:</~
j
i
CJ
c:~::::::=:::
:'~-J
.
,j
II
~.
-,.
_/
D
~..
/ .-"....~_._.._._.......
.1t=J~//
I 1
i :
\ \ I
\ "'-- -'--- -1 \
~ --...c.__ .._.___..___.._
~'- -
DO D-
0_-.--- .
/~
~"LJ
Ii
II
Ii
Ii
.1
il
n
. Dimensions rounded to nearest foot.
Copyright 2007, Dakola County-
PLAT NAME: SECTION 31 TWN 114 RANGE 19
TAX DESCRIPTION: S 130 FT OF N 250 FT OF SE
1/4 OF SW 1/4 E OF RR
3111419
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 responsible for any inaccuracies herein contained. If discrepancies are
found, please contact Dakota County Survey and Land Information Department.
Map Date: July 3, 2007
Parcels Updated: 5/31/2007 Aerial Photography: 2003
{'X'. R'2-
[
I
I
I
L_..__.__..__
c
~- -.---.c
L...m.. ~_._-\ r
.__ ll,-,,=.--.....__... ,,-_.""
;.+..,..~
Ii
ii ===Jf r
jl
I
I!
Ii
N
~
.
.
.
10-5-7: R-2 LOWIMEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT:
Page 1 offX, 8
10-5-7: R-2 LOW/MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT:
(A)Purpose: The R-2 low/medium density residential district is intended as an area which
incorporates older existing development as well as undeveloped land suitable for single-
and two-family development that are served with full public utilities. (Ord. 002-469, 2-19-
2002)
(B) Bulk And Density Standards:
1. Minimum Standards:
Lot area
Single-family 6,000 square feet
Twin home 11,000 square feet
Two-family 11,000 square feet
Other 11,000 square feet
Lot width
Single-family 60 feet
Twin home 37.5 feet
Two-family 75 feet
Front yard setback 20 feet
Side yard setback
Single-family 6 feet
Twin home 6 feet and 0 feet
Two-family 6 feet
Rear yard setback
Single-family 6 feet
Twin home 6 feet
Two-family 6 feet
Townhouse 10 feet
http://66.113.195.234/MN/Farmington/13005000000007000.htm
7/5/2007
10-5-7: R-2 LOWIMEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT:
Page 2 of 4
Height (maximum) 35 feet
. Maximum lot coverage of all structures 30 percent
Net dwelling units per acre (maximum)
Single-family 5.5
Twin home 6.5
Two-family 6.5
All standards are minimum requirements unless noted.
2. Accessory Structure Standards: Accessory structures must be located behind principal
structure in the side or rear yard according to the following requirements:
Maximum size
Detached garages
Lots up to 0.5 acre Lesser of 1,000 square feet or
.
square feet of principal use
Lots 0.5 to 1 acre Lesser of 1,250 square feet or
square feet of principal use
Lots 1.0 acre + Lesser of 1,500 square feet or
square feet of principal use
Storage 120 square feet
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) shed 12 feet
http://66.113.195.234/MN/Farmington/13005000000007000.htm
7/5/2007
10-5-7: R-2 LOWIMEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT:
Page 3 of 4
Height (maximum) garage 20 feet
. All standards are minimum requirements unless noted.
3. Minor Arterial Setbacks: The minimum front yard setback for all land adjacent to minor
arterial streets shall be fifty feet (50') from the planned right of way line. (Ord. 002-469, 2-
19-2002; amd. Ord. 004-514, 8-2-2004)
(C)Uses:
1. Permitted:
Daycare facilities, in home.
Dwellings, single-family.
Dwellings, twin home.
Dwellings, two-family.
Group daycare, 12 or less persons.
Group home, 6 or less persons.
. Public parks and playgrounds.
2. Conditional:
Accessory apartment.
Bed and breakfast.
Cemeteries.
Churches.
Clinics.
Funeral homes.
Group homes, commercial.
Hospitals.
Nursing homes.
. Public and parochial schools.
Public buildings.
http://66.113.195.234/MN/Farmington/13005000000007000.htm
7/5/2007
10-5-7: R-2 LOWIMEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT:
Page 4 of4
Public utility buildings.
. 3. Accessory:
Accessory structures.
Home occupations.
Solar energy systems. (Ord. 002-469, 2-19-2002; amd. Ord. 002-483, 12-2-2002)
.
.
httpi//66.113.195.234/MN/Farmington/13005000000007000.htm
7/5/2007
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463.7111 Fax (651) 463.2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Lee Smick, AICP ) 'k
City Planner ' D V
SUBJECT: Discussion concerning Drainage and Utility Easements and Recreational Vehicle Parking
DATE: July 10, 2007
INTRODUCTIONIDISCUSSION
.
The Planning Commission reviewed and recommended approval of a drainage and utility easement
amendment on September 13, 2006 and the City Council approved the amendment on October 16, 2007
(Exhibit A). The approved amendment proposed to include additional language that would not allow the
rerouting of drainage onto adjacent property, eliminate grade changes within the easement by meeting the
as-built certificate for the lot, and that any improvements that encroach into the easements are at the
owner's own risk.
However, the Building Inspections and Engineering Divisions continue to witness a rise in drainage
problems within drainage and utility easements. There have been a number of problems in the field with
the enforcement of this code due to the vagueness of the requirements that were included before the text
revisions were approved. The text stating "No plant material/impervious surface is allowed to encroach
within the easement that will negatively affect the drainage within the easement" and "inhibit the access
to the easement" continues to be an interpretation problem for the building and engineering inspectors in
the field. The "negatively affect" and "inhibit" language is an interpretation problem because at times
landscaped rock with edging within an easement will meet the code requirements, while this type of
landscaping within an easement elsewhere in the same subdivision will affect the drainage negatively.
This becomes an issue in the field since one homeowner is allowed the landscaping and one is not,
thereby, raising concerns from homeowners of either claiming bias by the inspector or by the homeowner
refusing to abide by the code because another homeowner has been allowed landscaping that they are not.
.
Additionally, residents often confront staff regarding plant material located in their easements, and they
typically refer to the "negatively affect" or "inhibit" language when disagreeing with staff concerning the
drainage problems witnessed by staff. Most residents don't see problems with removing plant material if
it inhibits access to the drainage and utility easements because they feel that the City won't need to access
the easements, if ever. Others complain about locating trees in the easement and arguing about how the
one-trunk tree would negatively affect drainage. Exhibit B and C are photos of a recent situation in
Mystic Meadows. The homeowner has been notified that the pavers and steps need to be removed from
the easement on Exhibit B, however, they don't agree with the need to remove the rock and mulch within
the easement. On Exhibit C, once again the homeowner doesn't see the drainage problems with the
location of the rock, mulch, and easy removal of the pavers if the City needs to access the easement. On
.
both Exhibits B and C, the engineering division is concerned about drainage issues because the
homeowner installed the mulch, rock, and pavers above the as-built grade, thereby, rerouting water onto
the adjacent property owner's lot. When the lots on either side of homeowner's property develop, those
new homeowners will need to cut a swale 5-10 feet from their property lines in order to provide a swale
that will drain. This is unfair to the new homeowners moving in next to an established homeowner's lot
because the new owners need to take all of the runoff, including the established homeowner's runoff onto
a swale located on the new homeowner's lots.
Since staff wants to treat all residents on an equal level the Planning Division is requesting that the
Planning Commission review the proposed easement revisions (along with the definitions) below and
discuss the merits of excluding all types of structures, landscape material, and impervious surface with the
exception of sod and fences within the drainage and utility easements.
(new text is underlined, deleted text is struGk)
11-4-4: EASEMENTS:
.
(A)Width And Location: An easement for drainage and utilities at least five feet (5') wide on
the side yard of an interior lot and at least ten feet (10') wide in the rear yard shall be
provided along all lot lines. If necessary for the extension of water main or sewer lines or
similar utilities, easements of greater width may be required along lot lines or across lots.
(D)Drainage Easements: No structures, elevated landsca~ material. with the exception of
turf grasses, or impervious surfaces are allowed within a property line drainage easement
with the exception of fences installed on the property line. No plant material/impervious
surface is allmved to encroach within the easement that will negatively affect the
drainage 'A'ithin the easement, reroute the drainage onto adjacent properties, or inhibit
the access to the easement. No grade change (i.e., berms, retaining't.'alls, planting areas
'A'ith elevated mulch, etc.) v.'ithin the easement shall be all(wJed. All landscaping must
match the finished grade approved on the as built certificate that is a).'ailable from the
building inspection division. All Anv non-conforming improvements within the easement
are placed at the owner's own risk. (Ord. 006-564, 10-16-2006)
10-2-1: DEFINITIONS:
STRUCTURE: Anything constructed or erected, the use of which requires a fixed location on
the ground or an attachment to something having a fixed location on the ground, including
but not limited to buildings, billboards, carports, porches, signs, retaining walls, and other
building features, but not including sidewalks, drives, fences and patios.
LANDSCAPE MATERIAL: Such living material as trees, shrubs, ground cover/vines, turf grasses
(sod), and nonliving material such as: rocks, pebbles, sand, bark, mulch, brick pavers and
earthen mounds (e><<:luding pa','€ment); and/or other items of a decorative or embellishment
nature such as: fountains, pools, walls, fencing, sculpture, etc.
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE: A surface that has been compacted or covered with a layer of material
so that it is highly resistant to infiltration by water. It includes surfaces such as compacted
sand, limerock, or clay, as well as most conventionally surfaced streets, roofs, sidewalks,
parking lots, and other similar structures.
.
If the Planning Commission agrees to recommend the elimination of all types of structures, landscape
material, and impervious surface with the exception of sod and fences within the drainage and utility
.
.
easements, the Recreational Vehicle Parking code will need to be reviewed. This code allows for the
parking of recreational vehicles up to the property line if an owner installs landscape rock with edging.
Of course, this allowance would be in conflict with the proposed drainage and utility easement revisions
above, since landscape material (rocks and edging) would not be allowed within an easement. Staff has
presented a proposed text amendment to the recreational vehicle parking code below if the Planning
Commission agrees to eliminate landscape material from drainage and utility easements. Additionally,
staff is proposing to revise the language for parking in residential areas from maintaining a 5-foot setback
for pavement to requiring the pavement to be located outside of a setback or drainage and utility
easement.
10-6-4: OFF STREET PARKING:
(L)Recreational Vehicle Parking: Recreational vehicles parked on residential property shall be
registered to the owner or lessee of the property and display a current license and may be
parked or stored on the lot as follows:
1. In the front yard, provided they are kept on a hard surfaced driveway. Recreational
vehicles may not be parked in front of the principal building on a residential lot.
Recreational vehicles may not be parked or stored on public property. Recreational
vehicles parked on street right of way must comply with section 9-1-9 of this code.
2. In the side or rear yard, recreational vehicles shall be parked or stored on asphalt,
concrete, or decorative landscape rock.
(a) All hard surfaced parking areas in the side or rear yard shall maintain a five foot (5')
setback from the side or rear lot lines. not be located within the side or rear yard
setbacks or drainage and utility easements.
(b) All decorative landscape rock parking areas may be located in the side or rear yards
abutting the property line. but shall not be located within the side or rear yard setbacks
or drainage and utility easements. The decorative rock parking areas shall be installed
to a depth of four inches (4") and lined with a commercial grade weed preventative
mesh under the rock to impede the growth of weeds. No class V(5) rock or gravel is
allowed. Edging shall be installed to prevent the rock from spreading from the
designated parking area. The designated parking area may not impede the drainage
within the side or rear yard utility easements or inhibit access to the easements. (Ord.
002-476, 5-6-2002)
(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') setbad: from side and rear
lot lines. not be allowed with a setback or drainage and utility easement. (Ord. 002-469,
2-19-2002)
ACTION REOUESTED
Review and give direction to staff concerning text amendments to the Drainage and Utility Easements,
Recreational Vehicle Parking, and Parking in Residential Areas.
.~~~
~~ick, AICP
City Planner
Inspection Division. All improvements within the easement are placed at the owner's
own risk.
. ACTION REQUESTED
Approve the attached ordinance revising Section 11-4-4 (D) of the City Code concerning Drainage and
Utility Easements.
Respe~~:UllY ~itted,__
~
Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
.
.
.
.
.
CITY OF FARMINGTON
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 006-564
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 11~4-4 (D) CONCERNING
EASEMENTS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. Section 11-4-4 (D) of the Farmington City Code is amended as follows (new text
is underlined):
11-4-4: EASEMENTS:
(D) Drainage Easements: No structures, elevated landscaping, or impervious surfaces are
allowed within a property line drainage easement with the exception of fences installed on
the property line. No plant material/impervious surface is allowed to encroach within the
easement that will negatively affect the drainage within the easement. reroute the drainage
onto adjacent properties. or inhibit the access to the easement. No grade change (i.e.. berms.
retaining walls. planting areas with elevated mulch. etc.) within the easement shall be
allowed. All landscaping must match the finished grade approved on the as-built certificate
that is available from the Building Inspection Division; All improvements within the
easement are placed at the owner's own risk.
SECTION 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage and publication
according to law.
ADOPTED this 16th day of October, 2006, by the City Council of the City of Farmington.
ATTEST:
\
Peter Herlofs!l Jr., C1
v
SEAL
Approved as to form thel7'A day of October 2006.
~~~-
'-IA.
Published in the Farmington Independent th~ day of C)J~ ,2006.
Planning Commission Minutes ..1 V-
laRMl\lY 14, ::~. ~ /"/ I za>(;.
Page 8
MOTION by Johnson to close the public hearing, second by Fitzlaff. MOTION
by Larson to approve, second by Johnson. APIF, MOTION CARRIED
.
.
g) Text Amendment to Section 10-6-10 (G) Tree Maintenance on City
Boulevards, Section 10-6-10 (H) Tree Topping, and Section 10-6-10 (J) Dead
or Diseased Tree Removal on Private Property of the City Code.
Applicant: City of Farmington
The City Planning Division would like to amend the City Code regarding tree
maintenance and would like to update this portion of this code. The code would
be changed to reference the natural resources division and the reference to tree
trimming notices would be removed.
Commissioner Larson stated that he would like to see more of the boulevard trees
trimmed so that they do not interfere with sidewalk use in the downtown area.
MOTION by Johnson, second by Larson to close the public hearing. MOTION
by Larson, second by Fitzlaffto approve. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
h)
Text Amendment to City Code Section 11-4-4 (D) concerning drainage and
Utility Easements.
Applicant: City of Farmington
City Planner Smick stated that she would like to continue this item, but she
wanted to get feedback from the commissioners on this subject. There have been
issues in the past regarding the blocking or re-routing of drainage and the
blocking of access to utilities because of landscaping material that is installed on
the side and rear easements. This does not include front easements. The options
being considered are to not allow anything in the easement areas or to revise the
current language to better define the requirements. Commissioner Larson asked if
some of the problem is a result ofthe R-llot sizes being small. Maybe there
would be less of an issue if the lot size requirements were larger. Commissioner
Johnson wanted to know if we could clarify that the items would have to be
removed at the owner's expense if they landscape in the easement areas.
MOTION by Larson, second by Johnson to continue until October 10, 2006.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
4. Discussion
.
a)
Amendment to CUP - Borrow Pit
Applicant: Independent School District 192
The applicant would like to amend the Conditional Use Permit for the borrow pit
due to a miscalculation by the School District's engineers. The borrow pit has
120,000 cubic yards of sand in it, not 60,000 as was previously calculated. The
area remains the same, as does the grading pattern. There will be additional
truckloads of material to be transported and the DNR and Dakota County
.
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO:
Planning Commission
FROM:
Lee Smick, AICP \ ~~
City Planner Va\)
SUBJECT:
Discussion concerning Sheds/Detached Garages
DATE:
July 10, 2007
INTRODUCTIONIDISCUSSION
.
Because of the new sizes in sheds, the Planning Division would like to discuss the possibility of
increasing the shed size to 200 square feet rather than the current 120 square-foot requirement. The 200-
square-foot requirement would allow a shed to be constructed without the need for a building permit per
the Uniform Building Code. Ken Lewis, the Building Official has required that the 200 square-foot shed
size be measured as "floor area". Staff is proposing that the floor area definition more closely resemble
the Uniform Building Code's definition and therefore proposes the following language:
FLOOR AREA: The sum of the gross horizontal areas of several floors of a building or buildings
measured from the exterior faces of exterior 'Nalls or from the centerline of party 'Nalls. The
floor area within the inside perimeter of the exterior walls of the buildin~ under
consideration.
Detached Gara2es
Staff is also reviewing the possibility of giving a range for the size of a "detached" garage. The current
definition for a garage, private is as follows:
GARAGE, PRIVATE: An accessory structure or accessory use 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,
and in which no business service or industry is carried on. Access to a garage requires a paved
driveway.
.
Staff is proposing the following language for a detached garage:
GARAGE, DETACHED: An accessory structure that is detached from the principal building and
requires a ~ara~e door with the ability to park a vehicle within the structure.
.
The range for a detached garage is between 240 square feet and 1,000, 1,250, or 1,500 square feet
depending on the size of the lot. The 240 square feet (12' x 20') is the smallest structure that a vehicle
could be located within. The proposed language is as follows for residential districts in Section 10-5-6 to
10-5-12 ofthe Zoning Code:
CHAPTER 5 - DISTRICTS AND DISTRICT PROVISIONS
10-5-6 to 10-5-12:
2. Accessory Structure Standards: Accessory structures must be located behind principal
structure in the side or rear yard according to the following requirements:
Maximum size
Detached garages
Lots up to 0.5 acre 240 square feet to the l!:esser of 1,000 square feet or
square feet of principal use
Lots 0.5 to 1 acre 240 square feet to the l!:esser of 1,250 square feet or
square feet of principal use
Lots 1.0 acre + 240 square feet to the l!:esser of 1,500 square feet or
. square feet of principal use
StoragenQ- Up to 200 square feet of floor area
Maximum number 1 of each
Side yard setback 6 feet
Rear yard setback 6 feet
Height (maximum) shed 12 feet
Height (maximum) garage 20 feet
There has been a concern from a resident about requiring the need for a paved driveway to a "detached
garage" (Exhibit A). His concern is the need to pave long driveways to a detached garage that typically is
located in the rear of a lot and is not used on a constant basis. Staff has reviewed his concerns and has
proposed the language for a "detached garage" that does not require a paved driveway to the accessory
structure. Additionally, staff is not proposing pavement to a detached garage because it has become the
norm to build homes from side setback line to side setback line. This would only allow 6 feet on either
side of a home and would therefore require the encroachment of pavement into the drainage and utility
easement, which is not allowed. The detached garage provision would allow a homeowner to construct
this type of structure without the possibility of encroaching into an easement. The homeowner would still
be required to meet lot coverage and setback requirements for the detached garage.
.
ACTION REQUESTED
. Review and give direction to staff concerning text amendments to sheds and detached garages.
R~2::V
~k. AICP
City Planner
.
.
.
.
.
e~.A
Lee Smick
From: Leon Orr [Ieon.orr@charter.net]
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 9:37 PM
To: Steve Wilson; David McKnight; Christy J. Fogarty [External Email Account]; David Pritzlaff; Kevan
Soderberg (Council)
Cc: Peter Herlofsky; Lee Mann; Lee Smick
Subject: Garage Driveway requirement
Mayor & Council:
I was disappointed to observe the approval of the requirement for a paved driveway to a
garage. I missed seeing anything on a public hearing by the Planning Commission although
I am sure that all of the legal requirements for notice were complied with. I think there
should be some type of special exception procedure that could be followed where the
applicant and neighbors could approve of a garage in the back yard for certain purposes.
There are many reasons why a back yard garage would be advantageous without a paved
driveway and would have advantages to the neighborhood. I was anticipating (have plans
drawn) for a garage and half in my back yard for a classic car. There would be no need for a
paved drive for regular access. My lot is very deep (the front of the garage would be about
100 feet from the back of my house. It would be abutting a heavily wooded area and a
substantial distance from any homes. It would match my house and was designed to look
more like a cottage than a garage. I would have no problem taking this plan to a public
hearing for an exception where neighorhood approval would be required. Unless I am
misinformed there would be no possibility for this now. W oulcin't this be better than a car
parked beside the house with a cover over it? Too many times the Council is adopting
"blanket" ordinances that do not allow for residents and their neighbors to have some say in
particular situations.
Sometimes the unintended consequenses of an ordiance are as bad or worse than the
problem the new ordinance is intended to correct when there is no outlet for exceptions and
tacky solutions have to be done by the citizens. I have always been troubled by the no
overnight street parking without regard to snow or no snow. It is a blanket policy because
some people had snowbirds parked when it snowed. Why not a very strict enforcement of
parking when it snows with more severe fmes for violators? Why do we punish
neighborhoods via the calendar instead of the need when it snows? Here the unintended
consequense is that people in my neighborhood and others park their cars at angles across
their front yards. This IS TACKY, TACKY, TACKY! When this ordinance was passed I
talked to then Council Member Steve Strachan. He started by saying that there was also the
benefit of less vandalism when cars were not parked overnight on the streets. When I
pointed out that the vandalism was probably worse in the summer with cars parked
overnight on the streets because that was also when people (kids in particular) walked the
streets, not in the winter. He then agreed. I know that their is snow removal equipment to
be considered but why not calculate the extra time it takes to accommodate a snowbird and
make that the basis of a fine for the violator? There are periods of 30 or more days that
6/19/2007
there is no snow to plow but we all must keep off the streets because the calander says so,
not any actual need. I think it is very ugly to see cars parked on front lawns when there is no .
actual reason to do so.
Bottom line is that the Council seems to keep ursurping reasonable citizen options to live
their life responsibly instead of simply dealing with problem violators more reasonable
policies. We pay for the streets but cannot use them in ways that they have been used for
many decades. We buy large lots and want to grow into them within reasonable laws and
neighborhood concerns but cannot! In some ways you are making our neighborhoods less
desirable, not the otherwise. This is almost always the result of "blanket" ordinances instead
of stringent enforecment of more reasonable solutions. Hit the violators, not the entire
citizenery!
Yes, it's easier for the snow plow drivers to have no cars ever parked on the street. Yes, the
police department has less enforcement to do. Yes, it's easier for Planning to have a blanket
policy of no garages without paved driveways without exceptions. But how about putting
the NEIGHBORHOODS, CITIZENS AND PROPERTY OWNERS FIRST some time even
if it is a little more work for those who are hired to serve those citizens?
Please consider adding to this ordinance some type of exception (with a public hearing) for a
garage without a paved driveway.
Leon W. Orr
19161 Echo Lane
Farmington, :MN 55024
651-463-8739
Ce11651-334-7574
leon.orr@charter.net
.
.
6/19/2007
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Lee Smick, AICP j ~
City Planner V'~\
SUBJECT: Discussion concerning Pylon Signs/Signs on Wheels
DATE: July 10, 2007
INTRODUCTIONIDISCUSSION
The City currently allows pylon signs within the B and 1-1 zoning districts. A pylon sign is defined as
follows:
.
PYLON SIGN: Any stationary, self-supporting sign not affixed to any other structure and
supported by a pole(s).
The Planning Division would like to discuss the merits of eliminating the installation of any future pylon
signs, thereby; allowing only monument identification signs defined as follows:
MONUMENT IDENTIFICATION SIGN: A sign identifying by name a residential, commercial or
industrial development which is attached to or supported by a monument structure which is
freestanding on the ground, extending horizontally for a minimum of eighty percent (80%) of
the entire length of the sign face. The sign shall be constructed of anyone or combination of
the following materials: brick, stone, decorative masonry, plastic, aluminum, colored metals,
or decay resistive wood.
Monument identification signs are more aesthetically pleasing to view and with only one sign allowed in
the code (monument vs. pylon); uniformity in the signage of the City is achieved. Monument
identification signs are allowed as follows:
(b) Monument Signs: Monument signs are permitted up to one hundred (100) square feet in sign
area with a height maximum of ten feet (10') from the ground (including the base) to the top of
the sign. The sign must be set back ten feet (10') or more from the property line and shall not be
located within the thirty foot (3D') triangle of visibility at street intersections. Monument signs in
the 8-4 district may be illuminated between eight o'clock (8:00) A.M. and ten o'clock (10:00)
. P. M. and shall be in compliance with section 10-6-8 of this chapter.
The requirement for pylon signs is stated below:
(c) Pylon Signs: Pylon signs are permitted as follows:
(1) No pylon sign shall be located in a required yard.
. (2) Pylon signs shall not be located closer than five feet (5') from a driveway or parking
space.
(3) Area and height of pylon signs are determined by the speed of automobile traffic along
the frontage street as follows:
Speed (mph) Area (SQuare Feet) Height (Feet)
30 50 18
35 75 20
40 100 22
45 125 24
50 150 26
55 175 28
.
(4) Pylon signs shall not be permitted in the 8-4 zoning district.
The monument identification signs may be located closer to the ground than the pylon sign; however, the
monument is allowed to be installed closer to the property line (10 feet) and at the same height as the curb
adjacent to the street, whereas the pylon sign may reach a height of 28 feet depending on the speed zone
of a street in front of the building to be signed, but is not allowed to be closer than 30 feet from the
property line if it is located in a B-1 zoning district. For instance, CVS has requested a pylon sign for its
location at 19Sth Street and Pilot Knob Road. However, the pylon would need to be setback 30 feet from
the property line, thereby locating the sign in the middle of the parking lot and approximately S-10 feet
below the road height of 19Sth and Pilot Knob. In contrast, the monument identification sign may be
located 10 feet from the property line and at the same height as the road intersection, even though the
height of the sign would be 10 feet tall. The visibility of this sign would be advantageous to the retailer in
this case because the sign would be closer to the road and lower to the ground where tree crowns would
not interfere with the sign. Additionally, the CVS building is a sign in itself, and would act somewhat
like a pylon sign.
The interference of tree crowns and pylon signs can currently be seen along Pilot Knob Road where the
Farmington Gateway and Marketplace centers are located. Exhibit A shows a photo of the Farmington
Marketplace sign on Pilot Knob Road. As identified on the photo, the existing trees are beginning to
interfere with the visibility of the sign. Exhibit B also identifies this problem as photographed from Elk
River Trail. The advantage to the monument sign in this situation would be that the signs would be closer
to Pilot Knob Road, the base of the sign would be installed at the same height as Pilot Knob Road, and
would be lower than the tree crowns for heightened visibility.
.
The Spruce Street Corridor zoning district currently allows a IS-foot tall monument sign for the
Vermillion River Crossing development, with 10- foot tall monument signs for each lot, such as
McDonald's and the Farmington Family Clinic (Exhibit C and D). Staff feels that uniformity in signage
of this portion of CSAH 50 is achieved with this requirement.
. Signs on Wheels
In reviewing the sign code, there is a provision in the code that requires signs to be directly attached to a
rigid wall, frame, or structure. This language allows signs to be fixed to a trailer (Kwik Trip Cow, yellow
signs with arrow) and located throughout the City. Staff is proposing that signs on wheels should not be
allowed in the City as shown in the proposed code revision below:
Section 10-6-3:
(D)General Design And Construction Standards: All signs shall be designed, constructed, and
maintained in accordance with the following standards:
1. Except for banners, flags, temporary signs, and window signs conforming in all respects
with the requirements of this section, all signs shall be constructed of permanent
materials and shall be permanently attached to the ground, a building, or another
structure by direct attachment to a rigid wall, frame, or structure. Signs shall not be fixed
to anything on wheels.
ACTION REQUESTED
.
Discuss the merits of creating uniformity in the signage ofthe City by eliminating the pylon sign and only
allow a monument identification sign. Discuss the merits of not allowing signs on wheels in the City.
Re... s. Pec..~.mitted --:?
~,
Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
.
.
8.A
.
.
Gx.s
.
I
I
I
I. ~
I
I
i
I
I.....
I ~ (
'... 1< ~
ol ';f,
Ii' ~i
~~
.~~ ~(
I:::::; 1 . ~
~.
C;<.c
4D~..a:
~ 1r
~~
.
tf:.
~.(l
~.
~.:
.....~
t
~
.;?",o. -
tl". r
11;0.
(
~'. I N" ~~.
. '
~
Il:.I
UI
,..
,t. 'J'
(~~
Al~1
11/.:
a~
,~;; -.,
' <". f
.
t::i'
!;;.
L
""__.. ""7;,0. __
1;::-"
.
r.
..O~
~;-t-
-
~ ...<~
".
\.
.~ .~,
'4 '"
".t ---J",..lc'l'
." .'~~
~i. -',.
~f.i_ ~~ _~
I
11\
.::
~, I
~ II
~II
.~ .
- ~~ 1
......... -'"-'
..~ ""':, I
....'L J ~~ If..~. t' ~ ,... -
.....~t;,~ ~.:, t..~... ,...' '1 I
.. . · or,". .-.I. >, "-' "&, ~.
r ....... .."' _J . t .. ~
~~:::~~~~ "'~.+,J. ,.....t~..... - Iff.-
.s: ..:.-~. -' " "
# 1/.,", . . . ., I
~,~ ,,'~ "
..'~ ~-;. :r , ..
,,' ;
, .1
,..
;.
.
...~
;,
"'...
,r'"
I'D
J;, "U1 ,~#r
=--"Q, ~ ,...
~>: ..~' .,
~ ~:; ,
.
\
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
SUBJECT:
Discussion regarding the City's Boulevard Tree Policy
~
f;P~: r/ t;1-
~ir:cI'
TO:
Planning Commission
Lee Smick, AICP - ~ J,(
City Planner ~ \J
FROM:
DATE:
July 10, 2007
INTRODUCTIONIDISCUSSION
.
The City's Administration Department and Engineering Division have been working for a number of
months on developing a new Boulevard Tree Policy where trees required to be installed by a developer in
a new subdivision be planted in the front yards of new lots rather than on the boulevards. This will
eliminate the need for the City to maintain these boulevard trees and it will protect City vehicles,
especially garbage trucks, from being damaged by boulevard tree limbs. The City's Natural Resource
Specialist, Jen Collova, presented a proposed revision to the City's Boulevard Tree Policy to the City
Council on April 2, 2007, recommending that the City eliminate the backlog of boulevard trees that need
to be replaced and recommending that any boulevard tree not requiring replacement as of April 2, 2007
would no longer be replaced by the City ifthe tree dies (Exhibit A).
Jen Collova then presented a revision to the Boulevard Tree Policy to the City Council on June 4, 2007
(Exhibit B) recommending that if a boulevard tree needs to be replaced it would be at the homeowner's
discretion and that the replacement would occur on the homeowner's private property. Staff also
recommended that boulevard trees would not be placed in the boulevard in new subdivisions as of June 4,
2007 unless an HOA would maintain the trees. The final recommendation stated that trees would
continue to be planted within the boulevards of tree routes designated as major collector streets (Exhibit
B). The Council recommended that the Planning Commission review the supported recommendations
and approve ordinance revisions to the tree boulevard requirements in Sections 10-6-10 F & G of the City
Code (Exhibit C). The Planning Division will discuss these recommendations with the Planning
Commission on July 10, 2007 and propose ordinance revisions at the August 14,2007 meeting.
ACTION REQUESTED
Discuss the proposed revisions to the Boulevard Tree Policy.
. ResPecW
~iCk' AICP
City Planner
.
.
.
ex. AkL
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 F~x (651) 463-2591
www.d.farmington.mn.us
TO:
Mayor, Councilrnembers, City Administrato@
Jennifer Collova, Natural Resource Specialist ~
Boulevard Tree Policy
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
April 2, 2007
INTRODUCTIONIDISCUSSION
This memo identifies current policy and staff recommendations regarding the City's boulevard tree
policies.
Trimming
City Code states that the trimming of boulevard trees is the responsibility of the City's Natural
Resource Division. Trimming is necessary for maintaining boulevard tree clearance from the streets
and sidewalks and providing structural pruning for the health of the tree. It is estimated that the
current boulevard tree inventory includes approximately 20,000 trees. Based on this estimate the
City is trimming approximately 5% of City boulevard trees annually. In order to adequately maintain
the City's boulevard trees, approximately 20% of the trees should be addressed per year.
Removal and Replacement
The City's current practice is to remove and replace trees within the boulevard. The City has a
backlog of requests for tree removal and replacement. There are currently 280 trees on the list to be
replaced. In 2006 there were 31 dead boulevard trees added to the list. The 2007 budget allows for
the replacement of 30 trees. A significant factor in this backlog is that the City recently lost a large
number of boulevard trees to high winds. City Code does not state that the City is responsible for the
replanting of City boulevard trees.
New Developments
Currently the City Code requires boulevard trees to be planted approximately 40 feet apart in new
developments. In 2006, approximately 1000 new trees were planted in the City's boulevards. These
trees along with the other new trees that are planted every year will need trimming and a percentage,
based on current practice, would need to be replaced if or when they do not survive.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Trimming
It is recommended to increase the current level of effort to trim approximately 20% of the trees per
year (currently about 5%). This commitment should be able to address normal tree growth.
.
.
.
Backlog Removal and Replacement
It is recommended that the City would eliminate the backlog of boulevard trees needing replacement
this year.
Removal of Dead or Damaged Boulevard Trees
This part of the policy is recommended to remain unchanged. Removal of existing boulevard trees
that have died, or sustained severe damage, would continue to be the responsibility of the City.
Tree Replacement
It is recommended that on residential streets the decision to replace the tree or not is left to the
homeowners discretion. If a homeowner wanted to replace a tree, it would be placed on private
property, not in the boulevard.
New Development
It is recommended to change the policy of requiring trees within the boulevard to locating trees in
new developments on private property when they are planted along a residential street. By locating
trees on private property, the City would eliminate damage to City vehicles, namely solid waste
trucks. Many trees are damaged and vehicles need repair as a result of tree branches growing into the
street. Sidewalk and curb damage from tree root growth would be minimized.
Maim Collector Streets
It is recommended that trees continue to be planted in the boulevard on designated City major
collector streets. The impact to solid waste vehicles would be minimal as houses do not typically
front major collector streets. It would also maintain some boulevard tree planting within the City in
new developments. This would have the net effect of increasing the number of trees that the City
would have to trim on an annual basis, but not as much as the current policy. Sidewalk and curb
issues would remain on major collectors. On City major collector streets the City would continue to
be responsible for replacing trees in the boulevard.
BUDGET IMPACT
The first table below shows the estimated costs for completing the current backlogged inventory of
tree replacement, based on the City's current practice and assumption of responsibility. The second
table provides estimated annual cost for tree related work and the current 2007 budget. The tables
show a comparison between the City performing the work or a contractor performing the work.
B kl
ac Of,!
Task Estimated Costs
Tree Removal & $200,000.00
Replacement (280 trees)
TOTAL $200,000.00
.
.
.
A
In.l 4-1
..r:
h n I' n
...I .
nnual nUui!et uipaCt lor tee OIiCY .n.ecommenuatlOns
Task Estimated Costs Current 2007 Bud2et
Tree $172,000.00 $43,000.00
Trimming (20% or 4000 trees) (5% or 1000 trees)
Tree $8,000.00 $8,000.00
Removal (40 trees) (40 trees)
Stump $15,000.00 $800.00
Grinding (20 trees) (15 trees)
Tree $12,000.00 $18,000.00
Replacement (20 trees) (30 trees)
(major collector streets only)
TOTAL $207,000.00 $69,800.00
Estimated City costs include staff rate, total estimated hours and a percentage incorporating supplies,
parts, fuel, repair costs, and equipment rental for stump grinding. Estimated contractor costs are
based on 2006 rates and a projected hourly rate for tree trimming.
Funding for the recommended changes would come from a combination of the General Fund and the
Solid Waste Fund.
ACTION REQUESTED
Council consideration of the recommended boulevard tree policy changes. Staff would bring detailed
funding scenarios back to Council if Council wishes to pursue the proposed changes.
:;:;&YGI'
Jennifer Collova
Natural Resource Specialist
cc: file
Council Minutes (Regular)
April 2, 2007
Page 5
.
o
'.
!.
benches have been removed from the plan as there is not enough room on t..lJe
sidewalk and they could pose a safety hazard along Elm Street.
There are several sites with fuel and groundwater contamination. There are two
main issues. One is the soil contamination. As the sanitary sewer and watermain
are installed, the contamination will have to be removed and disposed of. The
second issue is the contaminated groundwater. The City has a permit from the
PCA for discharging to the Vermillion River. The permit says what the limits are
as far as concentrations for various items. The location of the dewatering wells
and the timing needs to be worked out to avoid doing additional treatment. Ifwe
have to mitigate with additional treatment it could cost $150,000. This would
come from the sewer and water funds. Staff is also looking at options for funding
assistance.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a) Boulevard Tree Policy - Engineering
Currently the City is responsible for trimming boulevard trees. The current
inventory contains 20,000 trees and the City is trimming 5% of them annually.
Current practic so to remove and replace trees within the boul~There
is a backlog 300 ees. The 2007 budget allows for replacement 30 ees.
Staffreco Increasing the current level of trimming to 20% pe ar. It is
recommended to el~te the backlog of trees by removing and replanting all of
the trees needing replacing in 2007. In the future, removal of dead boulevard
trees would be the responsibility ofthe City. Tree replacement would be left to
the-hume owner, and It replanted the owner would have to plant the tree on their
private property, not in the boulevard. Recommendation for new development is
to locate the trees on private property along residential streets. Along major
collectors, trees would be required to be located in the boulevard. The City would
continue to be responsible for replacing and trimming these trees. The estimated
cost for the recommendations is $207,000. To eliminate the backlog it would cost
$200,000.
Councilmember McKnight was concerned with doing this in 2007 when it is not
in the budget. A large portion may have to be done next year. City Administrator
Herlofsky suggested borrowing from the solid waste fund. The backlog goes
back two years. Mayor Soderberg felt the City should honor the commitment to
replace the trees. Councilmember Pritzlaff suggested explaining the change in
policy and that we are trying to eliminate the problem. Councilmember Fogarty
stated we have told people their tree will be replaced. To not replace it seems
dishonest.
Regarding the backlog, it was decided to honor the policy of the City replacing
the trees. Staffwill bring an actual cost back to Council for eliminating the
backlog. Removal of trees in the boulevard reml:!ins a City responsibility.
Regarding replacement, from toni t forward the decision to replace a tree will be
left to the homeowner an if replaced it would be on their rivate property.
A-p~ 2-, Zo6
Council Minutes (Regular)
April 2, 2007
Page 6
.
12.
.
13.
.
Currently utilities are placed in the drainage and utility easement which is 10ft.
behind the sidewalk. In new developments, utilities could be placed in the
boulevard and then trees could be placed closer to the sidewalk. The practice of
promising replacement of boulevard trees should end tonight. This item was
tabled for staff to bring back financial information.
NEW BUSINESS
a) Approve New Position - Human Resources
Staff suggested adding a maintenance position to be funded by the water utility.
Currently the City utilizes maintenance staff to maintain well sites, install, repair
and read meters, flush hydrants, etc. The Water Board pays a consultant for meter
reading and lawn care around the well sites. A maintenance worker would be
added to the streets and utilities division of Public Works. Each year a
maintenance worker would be assigned to water utility. This would allow for
more people to be aware of water utility work and eliminate the need for
consultants. This position would also be on a snow plow route. Staff estimates
less than 25% ofthe cost of this position would come from the general fund. Cost
for consultants for meter reading and lawn care is $51,000. MOTION by
McKnight, second by Fogarty to approve the addition of a maintenance worker
position designated to the water utility division in the Public Works Department.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE
a) April 9 Council Workshop
5:30 Wold Presentation - City Hall
6:30 Council/Planning Commission - Comprehensive Plan
Human Resources Director Wendlandt: The City has joined Dakota County's i-net,
which is their fiber optic network. The City will cut over to that network this week. The
City has started a wel1ness initiative with a Shape-Up Challenge which starts Monday
and runs for six weeks.
Mayor Soderberg: He presented the State of the City address to the NDC and
the Rotary Club. The taping will take place on Wednesday with broadcasts beginning on
Friday.
City Administrator Herlofsky started on May 1, so Mayor Soderberg directed City
Attorney J amnik to provide evaluation forms to Council for completion. A performance
review would be held at the May 21 Council meeting.
On a future agenda will be the Fire Services Contract during the Fair. The Chair ofthe
Fair Board contacted the Mayor with a concern in the rising cost. This is also used as a
training event for the fire fighters. The fairgrounds has allowed the City to store debris
on the grounds during the storm a couple years ago and allow the City to stage the
Rambling River Days parade on the grounds at no cost to the City. The cost for the
equipment will be incurred no matter where the vehicles are parked. He asked Council to
.
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
ex. "
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrat@
FROM: Jennifer Collova, Natural Resource Specialist {%-
SUBJECT: Boulevard Tree Policy
DATE: June 4,2007
INTRODUCTIONIDISCUSSION
Currently the City Code requires boulevard trees to be planted approximately 40 feet apart in new
developments. In 2006, approximately 1000 new trees were planted in the City's boulevards. These
trees along with the other new trees that are planted every year will need trimming and a percentage,
based on current practice, would need to be replaced if or when they do not survive.
.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Tree Replacement
It is recommended that on residential streets the decision to replace the tree or not is left to the
homeowners discretion. If a homeowner wanted to replace a tree, it would be placed on private
property, not in the boulevard.
New Development
It is recommended to change the policy of requiring trees within the boulevard to locating trees in
new developments on private property when they are planted along a residential street. The only
exception would be if an agreement is made with a homeowners association or other such
organization where the responsibility to maintain the trees is that of the named organization in
perpetuity. By locating trees on private property, the City would eliminate damage to City vehicles,
namely solid waste trucks. Many trees are damaged and vehicles need repair as a result of tree
branches growing into the street. Sidewalk and curb damage from tree root growth would be
reduced.
.
Boulevard Tree Routes
It is recommended that trees continue to be planted in the boulevard on designated City boulevard
tree routes (see attached map). The majority of the proposed boulevard tree routes are designated as
major collector streets on the City's Thoroughfare Plan. The impact to solid waste vehicles would be
reduced as houses do not typically front major collector streets. It would also maintain some
boulevard tree planting within the City in some new developments. The net effect would continue to
increase the number of trees that the City would have to trim on an annual basis, but not as much as
the current policy. Sidewalk and curb issues would remain on boulevard tree routes. On boulevard
tree routes the City would continue to be responsible for replacing trees in the boulevard.
13-1
f,;. .. ,,""..
,itI"itu (1:,. "'..........
~!. '. .' .....
'... I... t, i
BUDGET IMPACT
If the City only replaced boulevard trees on major collector streets, based on current budget practices
there would be an annual cost savings of $6,000.00.
ACTION REQUESTED
Council consideration of the recommended boulevard tree policy changes. Upon Council's direction
the relevant ordinances will be updated to reflect the proposed changes and will be brought to the
Planning Commission for consideration.
Respectfully Submitted,
~llO~
Natural Resource Specialist
cc: file
13-2
.
i.
.
~!'.
~II;'~
~'. " .~
',q
.
.
.
13-2
01'
1!'. ."~,'.
. li;t.~;~ ':~' '.,
BUDGET IMPACT
If the City only replaced boulevard trees on major collector streets, based on current budget practices
there would be an annual cost savings of $6,000.00.
ACTION REQUESTED
Council consideration of the recommended boulevard tree policy changes. Upon Council's direction
the relevant ordinances will be updated to reflect the proposed changes and will be brought to the
Planning Commission for consideration.
Respectfully Submitted,
~lof:&-
Natural Resource Specialist
cc: file
.
NATURAL RESOURCES POLICY - x.x
BOULEVARD TREE PLACEMENT
Tree Replacement
Replacement of boulevard trees on residential streets will be left to the property owners
discretion. If a property owner replaces a tree, it will be placed on private property, not
in the boulevard.
New Development
In new developments new trees will be placed on private property when they are planted
along a residential street. The only exception would be if an agreement is made with a
homeowners association or other such organization where the responsibility to maintain
the trees is that of the named organization in perpetuity.
Boulevard Tree Routes
Boulevard tree routes will continue to have trees planted in the boulevard. On boulevard
tree routes the City would continue to be responsible for replacing trees in the boulevard.
.
.
Council Minutes (Regular)
June 4, 2007
Page 5
.
C0
.
.
Ash Street Project - Staff is soliciting quotes for sod along Ash Street.
Replacement should begin late this week/early next week.
Easements for Spruce Street - Negotiations are being finalized.
Charleswood Marketplace - Construction has started on CVS Pharmacy and the
retail building. Staff is reviewing the plans for the medical building. It is
anticipated the CVS Pharmacy and retail building should be completed late
summer/early fall.
Riverbend 2nd Addition - They are grading on the site and staff is reviewing the
construction plans. The developer is revising the final plat. Staff is working on
the Development Contract.
Fairhill - The PUD Agreement and Development Contract discussions are in
process. Staff would like to bring the PUD Agreement to Council on June 18,
2007, if the project is going forward this year.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a) Boulevard Tree Policy - Engineering
Currently the code requires boulevard trees be planted 40 ft. apart in new
developments. In 2006, 1,000 new trees were planted within the boulevard. Each
year this number has grown, and means more trimming is required. Staff
recommended the following:
Tree replacement - On residential streets, the decision to replace a tree or not is
left to the homeowner. If the homeowner decides to replace a boulevard tree, it
must be placed on private property and not in the boulevard.
New developments - Staff recommended changing the policy of requiring trees
within the boulevard to locatmg the trees on private property in new
developments along residential streets. The only exception is if a Homeowner's
Association would agree to maintain the trees forever. This would eliminate
damage to City vehicles, tree trimming, and sidewalk and curb damage from tree
growth would be reduced.
Boulevard tree routes - Staff recommends continuing to plant trees in the
boulevard along these routes. The majority of the routes are major collector
streets. The City would continue to be responsible for replacing the trees in the
boulevard. The impact to the budget would be a cost savings of $6,000 if
boulevard trees were only replaced on boulevard tree routes.
Councilmember Fogarty stated she was in favor of boulevard trees. Tree
trimming is a responsibility of the City. Boulevard trees are traffic calming. The
storm a few years ago created a huge backlog, but it is more the exception than
1-7
.
.
.
1-8
Council Minutes (Regular)
June 4, 2007
Page 6
the rule. The objective is to save the City money. She would agree with
replacing trees being the homeowner's responsibility, but she would still want
them in the boulevard, including new developments. She would not approve the
recommendations.
Councilmembers McKnight, Pritzlaff and Wilson supported staff s
recommendations. Staff will revise the ordinance and bring it to the Planning
Commission for review.
b) Approve City Hall and 1st Street Garage Bond Sale - Finance
Finance Director Roland presented results of the bond sale to finance construction
of the new City Hall and 1st Street Garage. The City received 11 bids. The low
bidder was Morgan Keegan at a net interest rate of 4.1866% and a total interest
cost of$5,187,124 or $171,368 less than estimated. The bonds are for 20 years.
MQ1]QNby Pri1Zlaff,.Se9QIl(;l byWi1~ol1 to l:I:dQPJ RESQLPTlQN R5Q~07
awarding the sale of the $9,990,000 G.O. Capital Improvement Plan Bonds of
2007 A to Morgan Keegan. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
12.
NEW BUSINESS
13.
COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE
Councilmember Pritzlaff: Noted the City is taking applications for the Planning
Commission. An ad will also be placed in the Fannington Independent.
City Administrator Herlofsky: Gave credit to Finance Director Roland for
obtaining such a low interest rate on the bonds for City Hall and I st Street Garage.
14. ADJOURN
MOTION by Fogarty, second by Pritzlaffto adjourn at 8:05 p.m. APIF,MOTION
CARRIED.
Respectfully submitted,
~n'7~
Cynthia Muller
Executive Assistant
b.~
.
10-6-10: LANDSCAPING:
(F)Street Tree Species To Be Planted:
1. Official Street Trees: The following list constitutes the official street tree
species for Farmington, Minnesota. No species other than those included in
this list may be planted as street trees without written permission of the
natural resources division. (Ord. 002-469, 2-19-2002; amd. Ord. 006-563, 9-
18-2006)
2. Allowable Street Tree Species:
Ash
Burgesen
Dakota centennial
Kindred
Marshalls
.
Patmore
Summitt
Linden
American
Greenspire
Redmond
Sentry
Maple
Cleveland
Crimson king
Emerald lustre
.
Emerald queen
.
Fire dance
Green mountain
Majesty
Northwood red
Norway
Schwedler Deborah
Oak
English
Northern red
Pin
Swamp white
.
Other
Imperial honey locust
Regal elm
Skyline honey locust
Sunburst honey locust
Trees approved by city staff
.
(a) Spacing: Boulevard Street trees shall be installed at a minimum spacing
of one tree for every forty feet (40') of street lot frontage or one tree per lot if
40 feet is not feasible. The trees need not be placed at even forty foot (40')
intervals; hO'Never, they should be installed as close to forty feet ('10') 3S
possible along the street frontage, allov.'ing for utilities, driveways and
intersection visibility requirements. The boulevard trees shall be installed
per the landscape plan. The developer is responsible for installing that the
boulevard street trees are planted per the landscape plan as required by
the development contract. Special planting designs for boulevard street
trees need to be approved by a landscape architect or the planning
coordinator the planninQ division.
.
.
.
(b) Distance From Curb And Sidewalk, Trail, or Pavement: Bouloyard
Street trees shall be planted in the center of the boulevard 'Jlidth botv:{)en
the property line and curb or the side'Nalk and curb. The distanco troes may
be planted from curbs and sidm'.~alks shall be no closer than throe feet (3')
eiaht feet (8') from sidewalks, trails or pavement.
(c) Distance From Street Corners And Fireplugs: No street tree, landscape
material or fences shall be located within the triangle of visibility, which is
the area within a triangle created by measuring from a point on the curb or
edge of the street closest to the center of the intersection, down the front
curb lines or edge or intersecting streets thirty feet (30'), and connecting
their end points with a straight line. No street tree shall be planted closer
than ten feet (10') from any fireplug.
(d) Utilities: No street tree may be planted within ten (10) lateral feet of any
underground water line, sewer line, overhead or underground transmission
line or other utility. Gopher State One shall be called to request locations of
utilities. Only columnar street trees are allcr....od to be planted at least ten
feet (10') from streetlights. (Ord. 002-469, 2-19-2002)
(G)Tree Maintenance On City Boulevards:
1. The natural resources program is designed to prescribe various levels of
maintenance to city trees located within city owned boulevards.
(a) Planting Requirements: The natural resources division will review all
planting of trees and shrubs within "city boulevards", defined as city owned
rights of way on maior collector streets.
(b) Landscape Plan: Developers of subdivisions must submit a landscape
plan to the planning division. The planning division will be responsible for
approving appropriate tree plantings within city boulevards. The developer
must
(c) Addition To Plan: Trees planted by residents on the boulevards that are
in addition to the tree plan must receive prior approval from the natural
resources division.
(d) Trimming Requirements: The natural resources division will be
responsible for all trimming of city boulevard trees defined as city owned
riahts of way on maior collector streets. As these trees are on city property,
and are essentially and legally city property, they must be maintained by
the city to ensure that they are properly trimmed for structural integrity and
disease control measures.
.
(e) Contact: Residents 'NiII need to contact the natural resources division
'Nhon a boulevard tree needs trimming or inspection. The natural
resources division will inspect and trim city boulevard trees defined as city
owned riQhts of way on maior collector streets.
(f) Height Standards: Trimming height standards must maintain a ten foot
(10') clearance above any walkway and fourteen feet (14') above the
roadway. These requirements provide clearance for walkers, snow removal
equipment and solid waste vehicles.
(g) Brush From Pruning: The city will not collect any brush resulting from
pruning or removal of trees or brush from private property.
(h) Emergency Collection Of Brush: An emergency brush situation would
occur when the public safety officer declares one to exist. Then and only
then will the city collect brush generated by residents on private property,
as a onetime emergency service.
.
insects or disease which constitute a potential threat to other trees in the city.
The natural resources division will notify, in writing, the owners of such trees.
Removal shall be done by said owners at their own expense within sixty (60)
days atter the date of service of notice. In the event of failure of owners to
comply with such provisions, the city shall have the authority to remove such
trees and charge the cost of removal on the owners' property tax notices.
(Ord. 006-563, 9-18-2006)
.