HomeMy WebLinkAbout11.12.03 Planning Packet
City of Fannington
325 Oak street
Farmingt9n, MN 55024
.
A Proud Past - A Promising Future
Committed to ProWding High Quality,
Timely and Responsive Service to All
Of Our Customers
AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
November 12, 2003
7:00 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
a) October 14, 2003
3. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a)
Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the Properties Located at 1 ooO;~~'l012, and 1020
8th Street from Low/Medium Residential to Business.
Applicants: .Ivan a.: Janet Janssen, Levin a.: Patricia Olson, and Harold a.: Karen
Gillespie a.: Grace Anderson
.
b) Rezone of 1020 8th Street from R-2 (Low/Medium Residential) to B-1 (Highway
Business).
Applicants: Ivan a.: Janet Janssen
c) Conditional Use Permit to operate a Commercial Daycare within an R-S, High Density
Residential Zoning District on the Property Located at 901 Elm Street.
Applicant: Anna Achtenberg
d) Comprehensive Plan Amendment regarding Future walking/Biking Trails.
Applicant: City of Farmington
e) Amend Section 6-4-2 of the City Code regarding the Keeping of Animals wjthin the
City.
Applicant: City of Farmington
4. DISCUSSION
a) Appoint two (2) Planning Commissioners to the MUSA Review Committee
,,1/1.
ADJOURN
.
.
.
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.cUarmington.mn.us
TO:
r< pc.-
City Planning Commission
FROM:
Jim Atkinson
Assistant City Planner
1. Comprehensive Plan amendments for the ~roperties located at 1020 ath
Street, 1012 ath Street, and 1000 at Street from Low/Medium
Residential to Business.
2. Rezone the property located at 1020 ath Street from R-2, Low/Medium
Density Residential, to B-1, Highway Business.
SUBJECT:
DATE:
November 12, 2003
INTRODUCTION
Three adjacent property owners have requested comprehensive plan amendments for their
properties located at 1020 ath Street, 1012 ath Street, and 1000 ath Street. One (1) of the three
owners has also requested a rezoning of the property located at 1020 ath Street. The
properties are currently designated as Low/Medium density in the Comprehensive Plan and
currently zoned R-2, Low/Medium Residential. The owners are requesting to change the
Comprehensive Plan designation on all three properties to Business and change the zoning
designation for 1020 8th Street to B-1, Highway Business.
BACKGROUND
The applicants appeared before the Planning Commission on September 9, 2003 requesting a
Comprehensive Plan amendment and Rezoning for each of the properties listed above. The
Planning Commission recommended denial of the requests due primarily to the uncertainty of
future uses on the properties.
Prior to appearing before the City Council for a final decision on the requests, the applicants
modified the proposal to address the comments received from the Commission and residents.
The new proposal was determined to be significant enough to warrant additional review by
the Planning Commission.
The applicants are requesting to amend the Comprehensive Plan for the three properties as
previously requested, but are only requesting to rezone the property directly adjacent to KftK
Auto Ranch (1020 8th Street). The applicants have also provided a site plan and screening plan
for the property showing the desired use and the methods that would be used to screen the
proposed business use from the existing residences to the west.
.
.
.
DISCUSSION
Comprehensive Plan
The ZOZO Comprehensive Plan, updated in ZOOZ, currently designates the subject properties
as Low/Medium Density Residential. In order to recommend an amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan, the Planning Commission must determine that a business designation is a
more appropriate long-term use than residential. Amending the Comprehensive Plan
designation for the properties located at 1000 and 101 Z 8th Street but not changing the zoning
designation would virtually mean that even though the best long-term use is commercial, the
best short-term use remains residential.
Zoning
As previously mentioned, only the property adjacent to KftK Auto Ranch is proposed to be
rezoned to B-1. As shown on the attached site plan, KftK Auto Ranch would expand to the
north to provide additional parking for automobiles associated with the existing business. The
properties located at 1000 and 101Z 8th Street would not be rezoned and would remain R-Z on
the Zoning Map.
Storm Water Drainage
A major concern expressed by residents during the Public Hearing on September 9, Z003
related to existing problems with storm water drainage in the area. Comments received
indicated a belief that the additional impervious surface would magnify the problem that
currently exists. However, any improvement to the site, including expanding the existing
parking area of KftK Auto Ranch, would require submission of a grading plan to be reviewed
and approved by the City's Engineering Division. The expansion would not be allowed to
proceed if the grading plan did not adequately address the handling of storm water on the
site.
ACTION REQUESTED
Consider the requested Comprehensive Plan amendments and Zoning Amendments for the
properties located at 10Z0 8th Street, 101 Z 8th Street, and 1000 8th Street. Any of the following
options would be appropriate:
1) Recommend denial of both the Comprehensive Plan amendments (for all three properties)
and the rezoning (10Z0 8th Street).
Z) Recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendments (for all three properties)
and Recommend denial of the rezoning (10Z0 8th Street). (If the Commission believes that the
best long-term use of the property is commercial, but the best short-term use of the property
is residential, then this option would be appropriate).
3) Recommend approval of both the Comprehensive Plan amendment (for all three
properties) and rezoning (10Z0 8th Street).
4) Recommend denial of the Comprehensive Plan amendment for the Z properties located at
101 Z and 1000 8th Street, recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendment for the
property located at 10Z0 8th Street, and recommend approval of the rezoning for 10Z0 8th
Street.
. 5) Table the requests in order to gather more information.
.
.
Respectfully Submitted,
Jim Atkinson
Assistant City Planner
.
.
.
To: City of Farmington
Attn: Jim Atkinson - Planning
From: Ivan & Janet Janssen
LeVine & Patricia Olson
Harold & Karen Gillispie & Grace Andersen
Owners of Eakens Add. - Lots 2,3, & 4 ( 1000,1012,1020-8th St.)
This is the modified request for the 8/8/03 comp-plan amendment and re-zoning of
the above properties.
We would like Lots 2, 3, & 4 to be changed to commercial business on the comp-plan
amendment.
Secondly we would like only Lot two, which abuts Lot one (the auto sales business) to be
re-zoned to commercial business (B-1) for an additional parking sales lot for the auto sales
business. The owners of lot one and two (the Janssen's) would complete the following:
The lot #2 would be completely graded so water doesn't run off the lot onto the lot to the
west of the property. Storm water drains would be installed on the lot to prevent run off and
connect to the new city storm water system being installed to eliminate the storm water
problem the city has on Hickory street.
A buffer would be added at the west end of the lot with a short retaining wall running along
the west side plus a six foot wood fence installed at the top of the retaining wall, totaling
over 8 foot. On the west side of the fence would be a landscaped area with trees and shrubs
to add an additional nice buffer and viewing area for the neighbors to the west of this lot.
When the new fencing is installed for lot #2 new fencing would continue along the west side
of lot # 1 as a buffer between it and the neighbor to the west. The fence on the north side of
lot #2 would remain as it is now.
Lot #2 would then be paved with asphalt. See attached drawings of the plan for lot #2.
Your cooperation on this is greatly appreciated and hopefully this would be presented at the
November planning meeting. If any questions contact Roger Halweg at 952-997-8845 or
Ivan Janssen at 651-460-6464.
Thank You, ~ n,
Roger Halweg t:::..::::rv
For the above owners. . .
Sept-24,2003
Request for Comprehensive Plan Amendments
Current Comprehensive Plan Map
Hickory Street
....
<u
~
....
V)
~
....
""
....
<u
~
....
V)
~
....
00
l't'l
::....
~
~
.~
::t
Ash Street Farmington
-.-----------------------------------.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------.
Castle Rock Township
N
L\
Request for Rezoning
Current Zoning Map
Hickory Street
oIo.J
Cl)
~
oIo.J
V)
..s::
oIo.J
1'0....
oIo.J
Cl)
~
oIo.J
V)
..s::
oIo.J
00
l'Y)
::...
~
..s::
~
J:
Ash Street
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Farmington
Castle Rock Township
N
A
.
Proposed Site Concept Plan
Expanded Parking Area
+oJ
Q)
Q)
"-
+oJ
(j)
..c
+oJ
ex:>
K&K Auto Ranch
Ash Street
.;.
.
f
v.e ~ e. et)~
rLrJCeC,7t \
l t ~;tft
\I lrD /'
9T /
,,/"
'7
L?\e~ \ 0
, tJ. -
OtJ~ \
V\y
.
~9
~
tV ~ ,,~
) of I
~~~(; /
~~ -
.
\;\~(0
~D ~
CD
(~ \,~~.~>
I
I
1,.
"
m e
~:!/'f>6'e,-fy be '1
~) (fJ~' CJ
(i)C;O@
\>\\\\)I~l v/l
_I
m~
~ f1rrlfjJS /7
lv
Yl~O
~ is? ~~
fit
(J"
/"1 II Irl f~
I I
;.l\ / ;
i ' ~l'
,I fi~le,
/
I; ! I-
,
I
I !
1/ ,
,
i
I I
,
I
I
/ I
i I
I
I I /
! i i
I / /
i I
,/ I f
I /
I
I I
I
I I
I
I
I I
! t:tJ f1. r€- L.e f
I I WI//
I
I I
I i i 50 /"E"- f wit cL
f i
I l-h -€- d l- fill S
I !
,
) i
I
i
I
)
/
/
/Od /) -- rsl/. $1-. - ~!,,,! c2
--_._~.-._--_.~---
F"fA 0 to -} l\ a <? '- 72013-J '- (g)-h. ~+~)
.
-j.....'
V1
~
co
I
~
~
~
~
~
~
.
~
~
~
<U
~
-0
-\-
~
"3
\)~
~
.
1;\ ,[ LJ 1- 1 -
<
Z~
t"---- -"-
- ___u- .
-----
--.-,--_.._----~
--
I,
-__--.e _M_
-------..........-_.~" .
~
u
"-
~
~ =-
(...
3
~
~
~
___. It
"3
---= -
.,...,.
~(
~
"
'0 -
-
....I)
.
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO:
City Planning Commission
FROM:
Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner Ie' PG
SUBJECT:
Conditional Use Permit - Operate a Commercial Daycare in an R-5 (High
Density Residential) Zoning District
Applicant: Anna Achtenberg
DATE:
November 12,2003
INTRODUCTION
Ms. Anna Achtenberg, owner of Anna's Banana's Daycare, has requested approval of a
Conditional Use Permit to operate a daycare business in the R-5 zoning district. The proposed
daycare facility would be located in the abandoned Farmington Family Clinic building, south
. of Allina Medical Clinic and the Trinity Campus and north of Elm Street.
Plannin2 Division Review
Applicant:
Anna Achtenberg
915 8th Street
Farmington, MN 55024
Attachments:
1. Site Plan
2. R-5 Permitted and Conditional Uses
Location of Property:
901 Elm Street
Surrounding Land Uses:
Institutional to the north, vacant to the east and south,
and residential to the west.
Existing Zoning:
R-5 (High Density Residential)
Comprehensive Plan:
High Density Residential
Current Land Use:
Vacant Building
.
Proposed Land Use:
Commercial Daycare
, DISCUSSION
The Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map for this property were revised on May 6, 2002
from Public/Semi-Public and R-2 PUD to High Density Residential and R-5. A text
amendment to allow Commercial Daycare facilities as a Conditional Use within the R-5 zone
was approved by the City Council on January 21,2003.
According to the City Code, Commercial Daycare is conditionally allowed in the R-5 Zoning
District. The Code provides the following criteria that must be met in order for the Planning
Commission to approve a conditional use permit:
.
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 or persons and
shall comply with the applicable performance standards.
3. The proposed use shall be constructed, designed, sited, oriented and
landscaped to produce harmonious relationship of buildings and grounds 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.
Plan Review
Ms. Achtenberg would like to relocate her current daycare business from the Farmington Mall
to the vacant Farmington Family Clinic located south of the Allina Clinic and Trinity
Campus. She is interested in relocating her current business to allow for additional building
and playground space for the children attending the daycare. The current number of children
under license by Anna's Banana's is 127. Additionally, 10 to 12 employees are staffed at the
current facility.
Playground Location and Access Issue
The plan shows a playground on the west side of the Farmington Family Clinic requiring the
blocking off of the current access to Elm Street. The proposed playground location needs to
be relocated. The original Conditional Use Permit (CUP) approved for the South Suburban
Clinic on May 13, 1997, recommended the following:
.
"The ambulance only entrance is shown as a future drive. To increase the circulation to
the site and provide an access for ambulance vehicles, the drive should be shown as a
permanent access. It is recommended that this drive be opened for all vehicles in order to
increase the circulation pattern in this area." (see April 22, 1997 Planning Commission
memo)
2
.
.
.
The Transportation Engineer, Shelly Johnson, concurs with this requirement as stated in an e-
mail dated November 3, 2003. Additionally, the Assistant City Attorney Andrea Poehler
agrees with the staff position on requiring the entrances to remain open due to the approval of
the original CUP in 1997 and upon the recommendation of the Transportation Engineer.
Trinity, the owner of the property, wants to block the accesses because they no longer need
access in this area.
Staff recommends that the entrances remain open and the playground be relocated to another
location on the site. The Planning Commission should review this traffic circulation issue and
make a recommendation concerning the closure of the accesses and the relocation of the
playground.
Parking
The City Code does not address the parking requirement for commercial daycare facilities.
Section 10-6-4 addresses parking required in commercial group homes which is similar to a
daycare facility; therefore, staff requires that Anna's Banana's provide 35 parking spaces at
the Farmington Family Clinic building. The plan currently shows 12 spaces.
Landscaping
The property was landscaped when the Farmington Family Clinic building was constructed in
1998 and, therefore, meets City requirements.
Building Official's Review
The review by the Building Official is attached for the Planning Commission's review.
ACTION REQUESTED
Approve the Conditional Use Permit for Anna's Banana's Daycare contingent upon the
following:
1. The playground be relocated and the accesses to Elm Street remain open per the
requirements stated in the Conditional Use Permit approved on May 13, 1997 and
recommendations by the Traffic Engineer in his memo dated November 3,2003.
2. The applicant shall comply with all applicable parking requirements included in Section
10-6-4 of the City Code.
J:te
Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
cc:
Anna Achtenberg, Anna's Banana's Daycare
Carol Raw, Trinity
3
..
/
PLAYGROUND
ACCESS DOOR
( .
[=
r-x-x-
I x-x
.
I
.
~ I
('I).
.
I
.
INFANT!
TODDLER PLAY
AREA
1475 SF
(19 CHILDREN)
SECONDARY
EXIT GATE
,--- x- x--1~
/1 '~"
33'-6- '" I
~ f,
/ If
'"
FENCE AND GATES ~ /
BY OTHERS ~~/ .
.~
'" ,,<;)
/
I'"
.
HARD PAVEMENT
PLAY AREA
7200 SF
, (96 qHILDREN)
........
.,~:~,,~~, .' ..
~~ ~
./ ~~
t. . - ~ "">::",
~1 ) '\'\.
( \,\
.).... -'-J-'" \\,
~'I \
-- It>
~1 1
<r~
.~;.
~
r:>,
...
.'L.
J
--<
~.~ <'"
.; . . :.' ~~
L . ~J
~....~~c~~~~
;::...,: . "" "V BY OWNER
. ~'V~)--r' t
~ .. ---
,.,,: 11___
(( '-- '__ ,~FENCEANOGATESBYOWN
c;fH?J/lS ~ (i 87'oC' '-- '__
. /:rPjt?W jJJut i - '--
~/ ,t?it/j~~ : /'~ EXISTING
I --7/, CLINIC
SIGN
--"
PLAY
EQUIPMENT
AREA
3900 SF
(52 CHILDREN)
"'~'.~''';~",",.'~-",.;
Oct.30. 2003- 2:10PM
cJ
~
.3
d
J
~
f"
~
4i
o
o
o
o
~
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
'l....,.J
NO.U-P. 3/,
Vl
I
tG
...oJ)
<
<
:2
<..
~
-rl'
It
.?J
~
. '~
---_.._-~-----~
I
I --r-T" ,.... '.
I --
----ti ~ .
10- ! ~
II
0 I
I I I
J I
~ I
I Q
z
t w . :.
I ~ II
I -'
I I
I -1 I
I
0 I
I
I
0 I I
I I
0 -, I
0 ~ I
00
0 I
I
t I
I I
I
0 I tt~
1
0 I
,'"' 1
Jj \l\ ~
. .~ 0 ~~~
"'}..', 9! I
0 I
'~ iil~ /
~ '1"
d 0 I
~ i' \\'~ ~~:
0 ~ I ~di
~ :~~ /'
I /"
./ ~
I I
/l
.
]
;
I
Is
'Ii
----..:
.
!Ill
z~
... t'
ClJ
ClJ
ll..
8 ~
-
c::::::::)
c===:> 0 ~
~ [
~~ 0 ~
~
= ~ ~
~ ~
<J
<IJ
~
<J
V'I
.r:
<J
M
.....
N
( '^^"H
~'l:~.
,~ft,..,....:
...~".;l.'
Lee Smick
Mrom:
went:
To:
Subject:
Shelly Johnson (External)
Monday, November 03, 2003 1 :47 PM
Lee Smick
Anna's Banana's Day Care
I have reviewed the site plan for the above referenced day care facility. With regard to
the proposed closure of the 9th Street access to/from the clinic area, I would recommend
that the acces be retained. The closure of that access would force all clinic traffic to
use 213th Street with the very strong majority of the traffic then proceeding to TH 3....
With the present access plan, clinic traffic is afforded the option of using the access to
9th Street and then to proceed to the TH 3 signalized intersection with 9th Street. Those
persons living in the East Farmington area can also use the existing access thus never
having to travel on TH 3.
It has been mentioned by me before that the 213th intersection with TH 3 is beginning to
be an operational problem due to its close proximity to the TH 3 signalized location at
9th Street/CR 50. As development continues to occur along the 213th Street corridor, this
problem could possibly be magnified from today's conditions. Therefore, the closure of
the 9th Street access that presently exists would force all traffic to/from the clinic to
use 213 th Street. Any attempt to reduce the traffic on 213th Street should be embraced
by the City of Farmington.
Based on the site plan, I fully understand that the outdoor play area planning would have
to change to allow the continuance of the access to remain inplace. I would hope that a
revised plan could be provided by the applicant.
The remainder of the site planning --- regarding access and parking, utilizes what is
~nPlace today. I see no reason to modify that element of the plan.....
If there are any questions regarding my comments, please do not hesitate to contact
me..... .
Shelly Johnson
.
1
.
.
.
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
PLAN REVIEW REPORT
Date Received: October 23,2003
Contractor
TMH Construction, Inc.
701 Heritage Lane
Belle Plaine, MN 56011
Architect
Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
123 North 3rd Street
Minneapolis, MN 55401
Project Title
Anna's Banana's
Anna Achtenberg
901 Elm Street
Farmington, MN 55024
Reviewed By: Ken Lewis, Building Official
Except as noted below, the construction documents submitted for the project described
above have been reviewed and found to be in substantial compliance with the
requirements of the Minnesota State building Code. The building permit may now be
issued and the below requirements fulfilled at time of field inspections.
Exiting Requirements
1. Exit signs to comply with IBC 1003.2.10.1 and 1003.2.10.5
2. Room 121 door needs to swing in direction of egress.
3. Reception door #106 and #121 cannot be locked to prevent no egress to exterior
exits and A6 on finish floor plan, page AI.
Missioll Statemellt
Through teamwork and cooperation. thl! City 0/ Farmington provides
quality services that prl!sl!rw our proud past and/ostl!l' a promising/uture.
.
.
.
General Requirements
1. Unisex bathrooms need signage on doors and meet handicapped accessibility
codes.
2. Utility doors need signage.
3. Tempered glass is required on A3 (page Al finished floor plan).
4. Tempered glass needs to be on A5 at rooms 112, 109, and 106 (page Al finished
floor plan).
Fire Safety Requirements
1. Sprinkler required - Plans and permits must be submitted and approved.
2. Fire Alarm required per NFP A 72 - Plans and permits must be submitted and
approved.
3. Less than 75 foot travel distance to an extinguisher, 2AlOBC minimum rating.
All work, including electrical, mechanical, and plumbing must comply with all applicable
State codes prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
In addition, daycare facilities in an R-5 zoning district require a Conditional Use Permit
(CUP) issued by the Planning Commission. Typically, the CUP must be granted prior to
issuing a building permit. In this case, however, the City will issue the building permit
for interior work prior to the Planning Commission meeting on November 12,2003. At
its meeting, the Planning Commission will review the exterior components of the project.
A Certificate of Occupancy will not be issued until all requirements of both the building
permit and the conditional use permit have been satisfied.
Si~;;
~ o1'~
Ken Lewis
Building Official
.
.
.
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO:
Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director
Jim Atkinson, Assistant City Planner
FROM:
Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
SUBJECT:
Anna's Banana's Daycare
DATE:
November 5,2003
PLANNING DIVISION REVIEW
The following comments are based on the review of the Anna's Banana's Daycare proposed for 901 Elm
Street:
1.
The proposed playground location needs to be relocated. The original Conditional Use
Permit (CUP) approved for the South Suburban Clinic on May 13, 1997, required the
following:
"The ambulance only entrance is shown as a future drive. To increase the circulation to the
site and provide an access for ambulance vehicles, the drive should be shown as a permanent
access. It is recommended that this drive be opened for all vehicles in order to increase the
circulation pattern in this area." (April 22, 1997 Planning Commission memo)
The Transportation Engineer, Shelly Johnson, concurs with this requirement as stated in an e-
mail dated November 3, 2003. Additionally, the Assistant City Attorney Andrea PoeWer
agrees with the staff position on requiring the entrances to remain open due to the approval of
the original CUP in 1997.
2. The City Code does not address the parking requirement for commercial daycare facilities.
Section 10-6-4 addresses parking required in commercial group homes which is similar to a
daycare facility; therefore, staff requires that Anna's Banana's provide 35 parking spaces at
the South Suburban Clinic building. The plan currently shows 12 spaces.
3. Plans need to be resubmitted by Friday, November 7, 2003 in order to meet the Planning
Commission deadline of November 12, 2003.
/
.
AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION
SPECIAL
April 22, 1997
1.
CALL TO ORDER
2.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
a)
7:00 - Variance for setback of arena team rooms - Parks & Recreation Dept.
The Farmington arks & Recreation Department' proposing an arena team locker room
to be constructed 0 the east side of the existin armington Ice Arena. The proposed
locker room expansl will extend to the prop rty line. The property to the east of the
proposed construction' owned by Frontier ommunications and a cellular tower is
located in the center of e site. Frontier C mmunications has been contacted about the
future expansion and has reed to allow 20' work easement on their site for building
the expansion.
. Recommendation
Approve the variance for construe on of an arena team locker room to extend to the
property line at the Farmington I
b)
East Farmington 3rd Addi . on consists of 80 ingle-family lots and the overall area for
the plat consists of appro rmately 46 acres. site is located to the north and east of
East Farmington 1 st Ad ition. The developer re ntly submitted this plat in January
showing 145 single-:5 'ly lots with lot sizes Varyl from 5,300 to 8,750 square feet and
lot widths from 53 to 5 feet, however, because of d sity issues, the plat has been
resubmitted to sho ot sizes varying from 6,000 to 8, 0 square feet and lot width
between 60 and 80 feet. The resubmitted plat follows th typical block and lot layouts
found in East F ington 1 st and 2nd Additions. South S urban Medical Center is
located to the w st of the proposed plat and the Prairie Wate ay is located to the east.
The plat has n been reviewed by the engineering staff becaus of the reduction of
personnel in e department. The preliminary and final plat fees ave been paid.
.
\~...
\
\~
Recommendation
.
Continue the public hearing to the May 13th Planning Commission to allow the
engineering staffto review the preliminary and final plat.
fC)
South Suburban Medical Center located at 3410 213th Street West is proposing to expand
to the west of the existing facility and construct an 82' x 152' (12,464 s.f.) professional
office building to house doctor's offices and a 1,224 square foot pharmacy. The proposed
project is located within an existing R-l zone and Bob Johnson, Chief Executive Officer
of South Suburban Medical Center is seeking a conditional use approval. The existing
site is relatively flat and surrounding uses include residential uses to the north, south and
west of the proposed project. A petition to extend Elm Street (New Street) has been
submitted to the City Council to begin preliminary street plans and evaluate assessments.
The proposed project requires seventy-one parking spaces and seventy-one parking
spaces are shown. A prescription pick-up window will be located in the northwest comer
of the office building and circulation to the window will be directed through the existing
medical center parking lot to the east. The pharmacy is required to be located in this area
in order to be in full view of the hospital in order to fulfill contractual agreements and is
located to the northeast of the proposed project. The conditional use permit fee has been
paid. The following staff comments have been observed:
7:30 - Conditional Use - South Suburban Medical Facility
.
.
1. The ambulance only entrance is shown as a future drive. To increase the circulation
to the site and provide an access for ambulance vehicles, the drive should be shown as
a permanent access. It is recommended that this drive be opened for all vehicles in
order to increase the circulation pattern in this area.
2. The drive on the north end of the proposed building is required to be a one-way street
and should be marked on the pavement with signage indicating the direction of traffic.
3. Stop signs are required to be shown at the north end of the existing medical facility, at
the north end of the proposed building for traffic safety and at the west end of the
proposed building near the pick-up window.
4. No parking signs are required to be located every 75 feet along the front and along the
east side of the proposed building and pavement markings labeling fire lanes are
required to be shown.
5. A fire hydrant located on the east side of the proposed access location is required.
6. The median strip located in front of the proposed building shall show the type of
material to be used for the crosswalk over the median.
7. Sidewalks are to labeled along the perimeter of the building.
8. A sidewalk is required to be shown on the south side of the street and should be
incorporated into the street plans.
9. The existing structures shown on the property shall be labeled "to be removed".
1 O. Additional lighting is required at the south end of the parking lot. Exterior lights shall
be deflected to eliminate nuisance and hazardous lighting and shall not be directed
(
,
.
towards vehicular traffic or contiguous residential districts and the type of lighting
standards shall be shown on the plan.
11. Planting islands with concrete curb and gutter and landscaping are required at the
parking aisle in the center of the parking lot.
12. A planting schedule consisting of key, botanical name, common name, quantity, size
and planting instructions is required on the plan.
13. Canopy trees are required along the perimeter of the parking lot every 40 feet to shade
the parking area.
14. Landscaping shall be shown near the proposed sign.
15. The location of grass areas is required to shown on the plan.
Recommendation
Approve the conditional use permit contingent upon staff comments and final site plan
reVISIOns.
a) Vari cefor Fence - Scott Siedel-18607 Egret Way
3.
.
ropertyat 18607 Egret Way is located the comer of Egret Way and
English A venue the home contains a daycare facilit . The owner proposes to
construct a six foot . h fence in the backyard of the p, operty in order to provide a safe
area for children to pIa . The owner is seeking a v . ance to the existing fence ordinance
and is interested in dete ining whether his hards p may constitute approval of a the
request at an upcoming v . ance hearing.
b) U(aiver of Plat - Gil A
The owner at 500 Pine Street is in reste in replatting the existing 120' x 170' lot and
creating two lots by the use of a Will e of plat. The lot is located in an R-2 zone and
requires a minimum lot size of 6,000 uare feet, a minimum of 60 feet in width with a
front yard setback of 20 feet, and s' e rear yard setbacks of six feet. An existing
house and garage built in the 40' is locat at the west end of the property. As shown by
the illustration, if the lot was s it to provid 60 feet of lot width for each lot, the house
will be located five feet from e proposed pro erty line and the garage will encroach
upon the adjacent property y four feet. The wa er of plat process has to meet two
conditions in order to be owed:
.
1. The property is P created by the subdivision are
situated outside the urban service area.
2. The lots meet e minimum lot requirements of the Zoni
.
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
APRIL 22, 1997
1. Schlawin called the Planning Commission to order at 7:00 P.M.
Members Present: Schlawin, Schwing, Larson, Keagy
Members Absent: Simmones
Also Present: Planning Coordinator Lee Smick, Community Development
Director Dave Olson.
.
2. mick presented a variance application from the Parks Recreation
Department for setback for a team room addition to the City arena The lockers
would extend ont the property line. Larson asked Parks & Recr tion Director Jim
Bell if the city has e option to buy the land from Frontier Co unications. Mr. Bell
said that an unofficia option exists. Schlawin asked how 10 the 20 foot easement
would exist. Bell stat that it would be a temporary 20 ot construction easement
and then return the prop rty back to the original state er construction. Maintenance
and access will come to north and south of the b . ding. No access will come to
the addition side. Smick p sented a preliminary s etch of the design of the locker
room. Larson asked if it w Id be just a girls 10 er room. Bell responded no.
MOTION by Larson to close e public hear', second by Schwing. APIF,
MOTION APPROVED. MO ION by Lar on, second by Keagy to approve the
variance for the construction of ena lock s onto the property line. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
3. ic hearing set for 7:15 for East Farmington 3rd
Addition Preliminary and Final Plat mick presented the details of the 3rd addition to
the East Farmington PUD. Smic rem' ded the Commission that the developer had
submitted the plat previously w' smalle lots and a higher density. The new plan
conforms to the original PUD greement. chlawin asked if the block designs fit over
the original designs. Smick tated yes. Sm k went on to state that there are some
engineering issues that mu still be resolved, thus the need to continue the public
hearing until May 13th. eagy asked if the ou ots were included in this addition.
Smick stated that they e part of the original P and will be platted at a later date.
MOTION by Schwi , second by Larson to cont ue the public hearing until May 13.
APIF; MOTIONC D.
.
;J.... 4. Planner Smick introduced a conditional use permit for construction of a
Il" professional medical clinic in an R-1 zone for South Suburban Medical. Smick
informed the Commission that a feasibility study has been approved for a through street
at the City Council. Smick went on to give the details of the site and a description of
the building; she went on to state that a number of requirements such as more
landscaping and a better lighting plan are still needed from the designer/developer at
the final site plan stage. Schlawin asked Bob Johnson about future space needs. Mr.
.
.
.
Johnson stated that they could expand to the east but should be sufficient for a number
of years. Schlawin introduced a letter that was addressed to the Planning Commission
from River Valley Medical addressing concerns about their plans for a 1998-99
expansion. Mr. Johnson said that he has met with the River Valley Medical group and
discussed their concerns. Lori Rossmiller, 904 Oak St., asked about ownership of the
property to the south and the hospitals proposal. Mr. Johnson responded by stating
that the plans for that land purchase will likely see future expansion of the existing
facilities as need be. The Commission voiced concerns over the traffic flow of the
proposed road and its access from Highway 3 and its connection to 9th Street. Don
Richardson, 35 Elm St., asked if a cooperative between the units would remain for a
helicopter pad. Jan Barbelquist, 3500 213th St. W., the clinic manager answered by
stating that they would work with the hospital on clearing the lot for helicopter
landings. MOTION by Schwing, second by Larson to continue the public hearing to
the next regular hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
5. Variance for fence, cott Siedal will be continued to the next P g
Commission meeting, reside was not present.
6. Smick introduced into disc ssion a waiver of plat for Gil derson at 500 Pine
St.. Smick stated that the proposal as to split the lots, but setback encroachment
problems would arise and a variance uld be required. . Anderson gave several
different proposals for alleviating the pr lem. Schlawin ted that he would not
accept a four foot encroachment to the g ge. Schlawi stated that the lots would need
to be replatted to two lots of equal size that eet the mimum City standards.
7. A variance for Dave Walls, 701 Elm S , fi a garage located within the setback
was introduced into discussion. Smick stated th the garage would encroach thirteen
(13) feet.on a 20 foot setback, seven feet off operty line. Schwing stated that he
would feel uncomfortable granting a 13 foot arian e. Mr. Walls at this time
introduced a second possible choice that w ld not quire a variance. Schwing stated
that variances are granted for hardships a tl there is n other option.
8. Discussion took place conce . g the revision to Planner
Smick stated that section H and I h some vague langua , "materials used that are
widely accepted in the fencing in stry" would be deleted. The word "plastic" may be
mistaken for "vinyl", Schlawin ted that they are the same erbiage and thought
"plastic" should be taken out. he line "not more than 2 mat ials may be used..."
Schlawin stated that it was g ing too restrictive and that peopl would make good
judgments on those issues d should be stricken. It was then re mmended that the
word "sheet" be added b 'nd the word "plastic". In Section I, S 'ck stated that the
word "good" will repla e the word "reasonable". MOTION by Sc ing, second by
Keagy to add the ch es and pass it on to the City Council. APIF, OTION
APPROVED.
(
,4A4~/3
.
Recommendation
Forward a recommendation of approval for the Y'reliminary and tinal plat of East
Farmington 3rd Addition to the City Council.
~b)
Conditional Use Permit/or SOllth Suburban ;\ledical Facility (cominued)
South Suburban Medical Center is seeking a Conditional Use pem1it for their site located
at 3410 213th Street West. This is a continued hearing from the April 22nd Planning
Commission meeting. The conditional use permit seeks to allow a medical clinic within
an existing R -1 zone. The proposal is to construct a 12.464 square foot building at the
south end of the existing medical center to provide for doctor's offices and a 1.224 square
foot pharmacy. The use should be viewed as to \\-hether a medical clinic should be
allowed within an existing R-l zone. Factors to consider is \vhether the medical clinic
expansion is compatible with the surrounding residential area and whether the clinic can
exist cohesively within the area. A number of issues \\'ere discussed at the April 22nd
meeting concerning the possible extension of the new street from Elm Street to Oak
Street. A transportation engineer will be on hand at the May 13th meeting to answer any
questions concerning the extension, ho\vever. the conditional use permit should be the
main topic of focus on whether a medical clinic should be allowed in an existing R-l
zone. The Executive Director of South Suburban ~ledical Center has consented to abide
by the list of requirements drafted by staff in the report of April 22nd and the revisions
\vill be sho\\TI on the building permit plans.
.
c)
Approve the condi . onal use permit for the expansion to South Subur n Medical Center.
Requested information cone ing the Dakota \lini-Stora project was not received in
time to conduct a thorough re\' w of the plan by the e ~meering department. The owner
is requesting a continuance of th ublic hearing.
4.
Discussion
tfj i~.D pP/
.
a) Riverside Estates 2nd Addition ~f~ I 1
/
The project proposes 55 townh0'" units on a 12.8_ cre site creating a unit/acre density
of 4.3 in an existing R-3 zon~ iverside Estates 2nd a ition is located to the east of the
proposed 208th Street exten . \ n. The proposed project is urrounded on the north by
vacant land located in EIre fo\vnship, the south by Fanm ton l\liddle School. the
east by the CP Railroa . and the west by the Riverside single-fa 'Iy home subdivision.
The site plan consis of a loop road at 24 feet in width and provide two cul-de-sac roads
II
rt
m
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
MAY 13, 1997
1. Chair Schlawin called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M..
Members Present: Schlawin, Keagy, Larson, Schwing, Simones.
Members Absent: 0
Also Present: Planning Coordinator Smick, City Engineer Mann.
2. Chair Schlawin reopene the public hearing f East Farmington 3rd Addition
which was continued from Ap '1 22nd. Plannin oordinator Smick explained to the
Commission that the plat has hanged since t e earlier date. Outlot N had been
removed from the plat due to t e pending s e of the outlot. Ms. Smick provided
a general site description, not'ng that e recorded plat name was East
Farmington, not Park Place. She also i ormed the Commission that there were a
number of engineering issues whic ha not been resolved, which City Engineer
Mann explained. The project engin stated that most of the issues were
technical and could be resolved. er Simones asked Mr. Mann if he recommended
approval of the plat contingent pon esolution of engineering issues. Engineer
Mann stated that would be his ecomme ation. MOTION by Schlawin, second by
Keagy to close the public he ing. AP , MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Schwing,
second by Keagy to approve ast Farmingt n 3rd Addition contingent upon
resolution of engineering ssues. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
{J3. Planning Coordinator Smick opened the continued public hearing for a
~ conditional use permit for South Suburban Medical Center. The request was to
construct a 12,464 square foot medical clinic in an R-1 residential district.
The clinic would be constructed on the south end of the existing medical center
and would house doctors' offices and a pharmacy. She stated that Robert Johnson,
SSMC Executive Director, had agreed to requested changes for the site plan,
however, concerns had been raised regarding the proposed new street access from
Highway 3. Ms. Smick stated that staff recommended approving the conditional
use. Member Keagy, speaking as an affected resident, voiced her concerns
regarding additional traffic through her East Farmington neighborhood. Member
Schwing asked Mr. Johnson if there were plans for future expansion. Mr. Johnson
replied that there were no plans in the near future. MOTION by Schwing, second
by Larson to close the public hearing. VOTING FOR: Larson, Schwing, Schlawin,
Simones. AGAINST: None. ABSTAIN: Keagy. MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Larson,
second by Simones to approve the conditional use contingent upon City approval of
traffic circulation plans. VOTING FOR: Schlawin, Schwing, Simones, Larson.
AGAINST: None. ABSTAIN: Keagy. MOTION CARRIED.
4. Planning Co~rdinator Smick opened the continued public hearing for Dakota
Mini Storage pla She stated the hearing wou have to be continued again since
City Engineering s ff had not had sufficie time for thorough review of the
project. Member Schl in asked if it wo be ready for the next regular
meeting. Ms. Smick fel that the June Oth meeting would be more likely, since
Engineering was still wai . g for a ~tional information. Developer Mark Peltier
stated he may be getting set ck e to the pending overlay zone issue. Chair
Schlawin stated it was his bel~ that since the project was already in process,
any requirements specifically' cre ed by the overlay zone would not be in effect
for this project. City En . eer Ma tated that the main engineering concern
was drainage. Member Sc awin was conce ed about platting of the street in the
next phase of the indu rial park. Coordi tor Smick informed the Commission
that City Attorney G nnis recommended requir the street be platted instead of
dedicating it as a .easement. Member Schlawin w also concerned about the
easement on the erty. Coordinator Smick inform the members that surveyor
.
.
.
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO:
City Planning Commission
\We...-
FROM: Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
SUBJECT: Anna's Banana's Daycare - Revised Site Plan
DATE: November 12, 2003
INTRODUCTIONIDISCUSSION
Staff received a revised plan for Anna's Banana's Daycare at 901 Elm Street after the
attached staff report was completed. Discussion of the revised plan will occur at the
November 12,2003 Planning Commission meeting.
ACTION REQUESTED
Review the revised plan for Anna's Banana's Daycare at 901 Elm Street.
Respectfully Submitted,
Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
cc: Anna Achtenberg, Anna's Banana's Daycare
Carol Raw, Trinity
.
.
~ &
8 ~ I I
~ ~ I
:]" i III
0: I I U
E rl"
~ B
~
t\)
g
J~1
g,*
c
-< X
LLJ
o
Z
~
LLJ
:I:
fJ)
l"-
I
f5
z
UJ
c:::
<C
(.)
~
C
(/)
-
<C ~
Z ~
<C t2
z
<C ~ ~
CCUl-
a:::Z
(/) t; 0
- \II....
<C ::I: "
Z .... ~ T"f a.
oo~o<(~
Z~ a::: ~ ~
<C ~<t~ t:: J
\"1 LL. :::( fJ) iI.
11"lli....,1 ~ I
; d 11: '
~~ ~;
U s~ ~
~. ~ . a
!@ ~@ ~i~
UJ@!l 8! 8,:,s
~;;I~ UJ~ ~~~
UYID 02 _8.
~~~ 8~1!! tin
;lI; ~g~ ~~if
:r~g tii~~ a::~ -
~~I ~n ~U!
a. u..izz
'II' j~ I
1,;1, , ~
,," . Q Z
pI'. o(W
I II . Z a:
'Iu! I ~ ~ ~
llill ~ ~ ~
," ~ f} ~
~ ...., ~.It ·
~ ..:r~ i i ~
n>i. ~~ ~
~ ~"'! ~
J<:j
~
~~ ~
li~g i
tj gi!~~SE
UJ ~~';~i::~'
!:: B~a'c~Elj
Q ~~~~~~~
a:: d~~~~~~
<( :z....:f8a.\l.w
~~ ; ~
iUl 5 Be
~~ ~ ~ ~~
~~ ~ a ~ ~~
d ~ ~ ~ ~~
~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~
... ~ ~d R ~~
!at; ~ ~~:< ~~
H! ~~ ~ 5~
8S ~ ilI~ <rI Ol!'
~~ ~ ;~ ~ ~i
~: g ~~ ~ gg
ffi ~; g ;~ ~ ~~
~ 5~ ~ ~i; II
~ ;~ ~ ~~ ~ lI~
-' ~~ I!' ~~ i ~Q
~ 5i ~ ~~ i ~~
LLJ ~~ ~ ~8 @ ~~
~ ~~ !' ~~ ~ U
" <~ i)~ ~~ ~ ~ilI
..0 ",8 ..;:1 .. iriS!
~
~ ~ ~
~~ ~~~~
~~~ tg~g
ffi~8 ~~li~
z :>:
~~~ ~Q<~
:E
~
~
t;
LLJ
~
o
0:::
a.
~
~ ~I 1
~ ill~ ~
1~~iJi!!i
li!z'~ qi
a:: liie.:.; ~
~ ~~~~~p
i: ~oii'5;;~~
o MU.Ua.U.W
~
,.)
o
(-''y
",,'
,r-'-"
\""J
I~
h
i~
\"--'~'./
~~ ~
!jW C
~~ ~
~~ UJ~
~~ 8~
UJO~ u~
(/) 85~~1D
LLJ u~~::;~
o ~~; ~:
o 9i~ ffil
C,) ;Hi g~
~ 0('
~
~~
e~
~.
~~
UJ @~
8~~
U~al
~..~
~g~
gi~
I! I!!~
II) ~ '"
------
--~
--,
------
__ i
__ --- ill
--~, ~l
----- \
,.(,:./
o -----_.
'1,
'--
"f
\fO\ "
~Ll'~, )"
==~__ ~r\~ , / '
/~, \.~~ ./
1:)0 '\~'\ '~~('2j~"
\ C.Jr.-0-, i ". A ~I
\~6(''# //
\-(~ . I //
""".,711 /
~/,//
p>'
/F
./;:'/
~/"/
.;:,~/
/':j/
;tPj/
R'/ ...I
~
.
.
.
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.cLfarmington.mn.us
TO:
. '-C
City Planning Commission VY
FROM:
Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director
SUBJECT:
Discussion of Possible Zoning Code Text Amendments Regarding
the Keeping of Farm Animals within the City
DATE:
November 12, 2003
INTRODUCTION / BACKGROUND
Earlier this year, City staff sent a violation letter to a resident who had acquired two pygmy
goats. The violation in question was not the mere possession of the goats; rather, the
violation related to the fact that the outdoor enclosure for the goats was approximately 130
feet away from the home of the nearest neighbor. The City Code currently requires there to
be 500 feet of separation between an outdoor [farm] animal enclosure and the home of the
nearest neighbor.
The owner of the goats appealed the violation letter to the Planning Commission. The
appellant and the Planning Commission jointly agreed to table the appeal to enable staff to
conduct additional research and explore alternative methods of resolving the issue. City staff
then reviewed relevant provisions in the City Codes of a number of different cities.
DISCUSSION
Some cities do not have any provisions that regulate or specify the minimum distance that
must be maintained between homes and animal enclosures. Cities that regulate outdoor
animal enclosures (for animals other than house pets) seem to do so in one (or more) of three
ways:
1.
They spedfy a minimum lot size for the keeping of farm animals (which is
generally defined to include goats). For example, Cottage Grove requires 1.5 acres
of land per "animal unit," and Lakeville requires at least 2.5 acres for anyone who
wants to keep horses.
They spedfy a minimum distance between animal enclosures and property lines
[60 feet in Cottage Grove] and/or the homes of nearby neighbors [300 feet in
Cottage Grove and 100 feet in Lakeville].
They prohibit the keeping of farm animals on "non-farm" properties unless an
interim use permit is issued [as in Lakeville].
2.
3.
.
.
.
Minimum Lot Size
The Farmington City Code does not specify a mlmmum lot size for the keeping of farm
animals. As a result, property owners in any residential neighborhood can currently keep
farm animals on their property as long as they are able to meet the existing SOD-foot spacing
requirement between animal pens and nearby homes. At its meeting on September 9th, and in
the interest of reducing the presence of farm animals in residential neighborhoods to the
greatest extent possible, the Planning Commission recommended that the City adopt a
minimum lot size of 1.5 acres. Such a requirement would make the vast majority of
residential lots ineligible for the keeping of farm animals. If the Council adopts such a
recommendation, any residential property owner who has a lot that is smaller than the new
minimum lot size AND who is currently keeping farm animals on that lot would have a legal
non-conform;ng use after the adoption of the new requirements. In other words, the current
use would be "grandfathered" because the farm animals were already being kept when the
new ordinance went into effect. However, the non-conforming use could not be expanded,
which staff would interpret to mean that no new farm animals could ever be brought onto the
property. If an existing animal died or was removed from the property for any reason, it
could not be replaced with another farm animal. If an existing animal produced offspring, the
offspring would have to be immediately removed from the property. In time, there would no
longer be any farm animals on the property, so the initial non-conformance would eventually
be eliminated.
Distance Requirement
Farmington's SOD-foot spacing requirement between animal pens and nearby homes is
significantly in excess of the minimum spacing that is required in Lakeville, Cottage Grove and
other communities. This may be due, in part, to Farmington's lack of a minimum lot size
requirement. In addition to recommending a new minimum lot size of 1.5 acres, the Planning
Commission also recommended that the City adopt a new distance requirement of 100 feet,
which would be consistent with the City of Lakeville's minimum distance.
Fowl
A related issue arose recently regarding the keeping of chickens on a residential property. The
Code currently does not include fowl in the list of animals that must comply with the
provisions found in Section 6-4-2. If fowl were added to this section, the same minimum lot
size and spacing requirements would apply, thereby eliminating the possibility that chickens
could by kept in a typical residential neighborhood.
Citv Council Review
The City Council reviewed these issues on September 15, 2003 and generally agreed with the
Planning Commission's recommended changes. One change suggested by the Council was that
the recommended minimum lot size requirement of 1.5 acres be changed to 2.5 acres. The
Council also directed staff to investigate whether the distance of 100 feet should be measured
from the animal enclosure to adjacent residences as the Code currently reads, or to the
nearest property line.
The main concern with measuring to adjacent residences, as expressed by a Council member,
was that if the property housing the enclosure was adjacent to a vacant property,
construction of a structure on the vacant property would be prohibited within the 1 DO-foot
setback and therefore would minimize the buildable area on the adjacent property. However,
the Code currently includes the following provision regarding exceptions to the required
setback:
.
.
.
6-4-2(8) The enclosure must not be located closer than five hundred feet (500') to a residence
not owned or occupied by the keeper of the animals unless:
1. Said animals were kept prior to the adoption of this Ordinance, or
2. Said animals were kept after the adoption of this Ordinance but prior to the
existence of a residence within five hundred feet (500'), (Ord. 082-130, 4-19-82)
Any enclosure would also have to maintain the required setbacks of the Zoning District where
the property is located, In the A-1 district, for example, the minimum sides yard setback for
an accessory structure is 20 feet.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Recommend approval of the attached ordinance amending section 6-4-2 of the City Code
regarding the keeping of farm animals within the City.
I
I
Res(e~tfGllY SUbm,lf.ted"
; " I /?
Kt#ii ( {1bu6f/
c~munity Development Director
.
642:
ORDINANCE NO.
CITY OF FARMINGTON
DAKOTA COUNTY. MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 6. CHAPTER 4
OF THE FARMINGTON CITY CODE
CONCERNING THE KEEPING OF ANIMALS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON ORDAINS:
~~GJJ9N J. _Se~!.igl] 6_::4::: 2__0 f the FaITIlt!!gton City Cgdc i_~ ~~!cndyd ill it~_entirety to
read as follows
6-4-2: KEEPING ANIMALS WITHIN CITY:
Any horse, mule, donkey, pony, cow, goat, sheep or .:mimal r3ised for fur bearing
purposes may be kept within the City under the follo'....ing conditions:
(A) Anim31s must be kept 'Nithin a secure enclosure.
.
A.J::?_Ef!~JJI9NS: The (gllow5l]g terms ~hall have the following meaninfts:
Farm Animals: Cattle. hogs. bees. sheeo. goats. chickens. turkeys. horses. and
olheI_animals_J;omJ1JonLY_accepledas farm anirnahLinJhe State of Minnesota.
HO!1sc_..Pels: Animals s!1chas d9~_cats_.biIds (not includinJutigeon~bkkens..
geeseLturke.y~_or QJher domcsti_~_ (owl). gerbils. hamsJe.Th__tabbits (including those
nomlallv sheltered outside ofthe orincioal stmcturet and trooical fish. that can be
contained withiu__aJJxincioal structuIeJhroJJ...gllout the entin~ Year._pro_vided that the
COl!!!linrni?!lt ~an b_c acco.!poli~ht:l4_ without ~eciat modification to the structllrc
that would reauire a building ocrmit. excludinlZ wild or domesticated wild
animals.
B. _...____HQUSEPETS._Tb~ekecoin~Qfbouse oets is a_~mitted accessory use in all
Zo.!!il~ districts.
C. F ARM ANIMALS. The keeoinlZ of farm animals is a oermitted accessory use in
all zoning districts orovided:
1. The miniIl}Um lot size is two and one-half (7 1/2) acres.
.
108983
.
(B) The enclosure must not be located closer th:m five2. Farm animals may
nQt be confinec!!!!_,! pe_n. feedlot or buildine: within_ one hundred feet (500') to a
residence 100') of any residential dwellil1l! not owned or occupiedleased by the
keeper of the animals~ unless:
1. Saida. The animals were kept prior to the adoption of this Ordinance,
or
2. Said1L-JM animals were kept after the adoption of this Ordinance but
prior to the existence of a residence within Hveone hundred feet (~
COrd. 082 130,1 1982) 100').
D. PROHIBITION. With the exception of the keeping of animals allowed by
_(i!Jhs~ctions Band C oObis Section., no other animals are allillyed except bv
!m~t!!!l: u~e permit as r~gul~ted und~t tl1eJ2!9yisions of Se~t!on 10-3-7.
g:____ __ ~O~~ERCIAL_ rURPOSES. Animals may only be kept for commercial
purposes if authorized in the zoning district where the animals are located.
F. _NDISANCE ANIMALS_,_ ..Animals may not_be kept if they.c.au_se a nuisance .or
endangerJhe~health._QLs_afelY_Qfth~QJI\nI!Jni.t~
Q~_A~IMAJ:_gN~J:Q~!1J~:g_~,__A!ljg1l!12!!~L()$!!t~_~~~_llPi~ct to th_~_':l~~es_s()D'
structure reauirements of subsection 10-6-6.
.
SEC1JQN_2.__g~~~pt forSection6-4-2(C)(l) under Section 1. this ordinance shall be
effectiye immediately upon its oassage. Section 6-4-2(C)(1) under Section 1 of this
onlinance shall be_effectiye on the fifth day after passa.\Le of this ordinance.
ADOPTED this
Farmington.
day of
20 . by the City Council ofthe City of
CITY OF FARMINGTON
By:
Gerald Ristow. Mayor
Attest:
________ D!:ln SiebenaleJ;,)nterim City Administrator
SEAL
8..l'2tOv~d .?S ~o f()!:I!!th~_
day ()f
.20
City AttgffiJQ'
.
published in the EarrningtQu Independent the
20
daY of
108983
.
ORDINANCE NO.
CITY OF FARMINGTON
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 6, CHAPTER 4
OF THE FARMINGTON CITY CODE
CONCERNING THE KEEPING OF ANIMALS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. Section 6-4-2 of the Farmington City Code is amended in its entirety to
read as follows
6-4-2: KEEPING ANIMALS WITHIN CITY:
A.
DEFINITIONS: The following terms shall have the following meanings:
.
Farm Animals: Cattle, hogs, bees, sheep, goats, chickens, turkeys, horses, and
other animals commonly accepted as farm animals in the State of Minnesota.
House Pets: Animals such as dogs, cats, birds (not including pigeons, chickens,
geese, turkeys or other domestic fowl), gerbils, hamsters, rabbits (including those
normally sheltered outside of the principal structure), and tropical fish, that can be
contained within a principal structure throughout the entire year, provided that the
containment can be accomplished without special modification to the structure
that would require a building permit, excluding wild or domesticated wild
animals.
B.
HOUSE PETS. The keeping of house pets is a permitted accessory use in all
zoning districts.
C.
FARM ANIMALS. The keeping of farm animals is a permitted accessory use in
all zoning districts provided:
1. The minimum lot size is two and one-half (2 1/2) acres.
2. Farm animals may not be confined in a pen, feedlot or building within one
hundred feet (100') of any residential dwelling not owned or leased by the keeper
of the animals, unless:
.
a. The animals were kept prior to the adoption of this Ordinance, or
b. The animals were kept after the adoption of this Ordinance but prior to
the existence of a residence within one hundred feet (100').
]08983
D.
PROHIBITION. With the exception of the keeping of animals allowed by
subsections Band C of this Section, no other animals are allowed except by
interim use permit as regulated under the provisions of Section 10-3-7.
.
E. COMMERCIAL PURPOSES. Animals may only be kept for commercial
purposes if authorized in the zoning district where the animals are located.
F. NUISANCE ANIMALS. Animals may not be kept if they cause a nuisance or
endanger the health or safety of the community.
G. ANIMAL ENCLOSURES. Animal enclosures shall be subject to the accessory
structure requirements of subsection 10-6-6.
SECTION 2. Except for Section 6-4-2(C)(1) under Section 1, this ordinance shall be
effective immediately upon its passage. Section 6-4-2(C)(1) under Section 1 of this
ordinance shall be effective on the fifth day after passage of this ordinance.
ADOPTED this _ day of
Farmington.
20_, by the City Council of the City of
CITY OF FARMINGTON
By:
.
Gerald Ristow, Mayor
Attest:
Dan Siebenaler, Interim City Administrator
SEAL
Approved as to form the
day of
,20_.
City Attorney
Published in the Farmington Independent the
20
day of
.
108983
.
.
.
E'i'S~~
6-4-2: KEEPING WITHIN CITY:
Any horse, mule, donkey, pony, cow, goat, sheep or animal raised for fur-bearing purposes
may be kept within the City under the following conditions:
(A) Animals must be kept within a secure enclosure.
(B) The enclosure must not be located closer than five hundred feet (500') to a residence
not owned or occupied by the keeper of the animals unless:
1. Said animals were kept prior to the adoption of this Ordinance, or
2. Said animals were kept after the adoption of this Ordinance but prior to the existence
of a residence within five hundred feet (500'). (Ord. 082-130,4-19-82)
.
.
.
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
INTRODUCTION
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
City Planning Commission
. ;)c-
Li
Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
Planning Commission Appointment(s) to MUSA Review Committee
November 12, 2003
The Planning Commission needs to appoint two of its members to serve on the MUSA Review
Committee.
DISCUSSION
The Planning Commission discussed the composition of the MUSA Review Committee at its
meeting on August 12,2003. The Commission's recommendations regarding the composition of
the Committee were discussed and approved by the City Council at its meeting on September 2,
2003. The make-up of the Committee will be as follows:
"Constituent Grou "
Ci Elected Officials
City Staff and/or Consultants
ISD 192
Ci A ointed Officials
Parks & Recreation
Pro osed Re resentatives
Ci Council members 2
City Staff Members (2) OR
Ci Staff Member (1 and Ci Consultant (1
ISD 192 Board Member (1)
ISD 192 Staff Member (1)
Plannin Commission members (2)
Parks & Recreation Commission member (1)
City Parks & Recreation staff member (1)
ISD 192 Board of Directors
ISD 192 Superintendent
Plannin Commission
Parks & Recreation Commission
Interim City Administrator
Each of the five "constituent groups" identified above will need to appoint two representatives to
serve on the MUSA Review Committee. Each MUSA Review Committee representative should
be prepared to attend a series of meetings between mid-November and April of next year. The
tentative timetable for the process, as previously approved by the City Council, is as follows:
.
.
.
November
MUSA Review Committee Review:
1. Time1ine
2. Application Form
3. Criteria
December
1. Distribute application form to property owners
2. Publicize commencement of MUSA review process
January
1. Deadline for submission of applications
2. Initial review of applications by City Staff; preparation of staff comments
February
Consideration (by MUSA Review Committee) of applications and Staff comments
March
1. MUSA Review Committee makes recommendations to Planning Commission
2. Planning Commission prepares comments
April
1. City Council considers recommendations and comments of MUSA Review Committee and Planning
Commission
2. City Council decides whether, when, and to whom MUSA extensions will be granted.
The members of the MUSA Review Committee will be asked to finalize details regarding this
preliminary timetable at their first meeting in late November.
ACTION REOUESTED
Appoint two Planning Commission representatives to the MUSA Review Committee.
M&::P
Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
I 'Il' ~ I ~ I
g ~ I '" I I
Ii ilU ,,,I, z ! . I
'l'~ I Q c(W ! I =
iil'! g " ;~ 11..~ Ii I!
" ! II oM
. ~ I J II pi! ~ i ~~ 1'fl !I I I I-
~ B 11111 . Z
-", J}:i . I <El I d 111_
l'\)
o
8=~. .
8 .;@.!......'....
co ..'
N .~
o .;.;
C
C
<
.
~
l-
I
€5
z
~
('\J
o
l.C)
l.C)
~
ti~
I!!~ .
~h~ 1
!!!lnz~ a:
J- ~ ih ',:;di E
frl ~~,,;~~~f
J- =><,3..,:::'
- oi5~t~"'~
is ~z!l!g;~~
!i iSi8~~~
!~ I ~ ;~
*~ ~ ~ 15
~! ~ ~ I~;
!!~ ~ ~ ;l ~~
n I ;1 ~ ~~
~~ ~ ~i!! ~ ii
~s ~ ~~ ~ ~i
~~ 5 !!~ ~ w-
i! g h ~ I~
ffi ~~ ~ ;~! U
b ii ~ ~! i ~~
Z ,,!<iI ~ ~,,~ ~~
...J 2~ I!! ~~ ~ ~?i
<( ~~ 8 ~~ ~ ~3
c:: g~ ~ h ~ g~
UJ h g , a: ~~
Z ~~ ~ ~s! ~~
~ 3g ~~ ~~ ~ :~
~ ~
o
z ~ ~ ~
- t;~ ~~~~
.... h ::>!:~~
~ ~U ~Ui
J: ~ is
CJ) ~Fl' !1ic~:!
:E
<( a
UJ 0 1
.... ~ ~I
~ 1\ ~Ii I
~ ~~I
UJ Ii:; .~
-, 0: hg~
0 \M "<,~~ii
c:: :.J
:= I~~~~ ~
a. o :iitu. a.
..f
0
r-'1,
\ .
. ,
,"'"
~
('
,..
~
!I
,
!
r-"'"
\,--)
I
i~
~i
LJJ
c:::
<(
(.)
~
C
(/)
-
<(
Z
<(
Z Z
<( t:i ~
caUl"
o::Z
(/) .... 0
- (/)....
<( :I: ~ a.
Z .... - T"i <( ~
CX)~~:E
Z OoM 0:: ~ UJ
<((Y)~~:;; J
,.
~.
c
.r.......
\,'-......l
:'~
~~ ~~
~~ ~ ~
i~ ~~ w ~
: e~
W8~ g~ 8.;.
e" ~- z~l!
05~w!~Q :
(J alC~lD~~~
~~~ 8~~ frl~
_~:;; C)~:;; b~i!!
h~ ~i~ lf~i
~d ~d ~~~
~~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~~
~~ ~ ~w
~~
~g wg 'g
j! eo wg~
0' eo
CJ) ~!~ ~~ 8h
SoiS ~E ...J 51!!
UJ ~i~
c C)~~ ~1oO i2 ~
Z ~I- (I) ~ ~
0 a~iil "'lil gig
C,J ~II ~I ~~~
'" ~.
----
---
__ i
-- II
------=-~ ~
-- )
,{,-----
'1.
-----
.:.. ---
-
~ -----
}'~. ------..-
.....li _____
, -
J:'~ --- --
,
'1
7' --_
\\I;t -----_
\\\:.,- -,
\~f; ---__
It -
''''
'~J/ /
h/"/
A;{~/
/.;'/
/:}/
~#
"l:/
/!~~/
fif/ ~/
/7/
-~?
/:.,/,
;;;-
,7
/;;;/
~{/
~l/
///
/#,'
~!>?;
/:.IlY
,;fY
11/
,;/
i/'
//
/J