HomeMy WebLinkAbout05.10.05 Planning Packet
City of Farmington
, ~5 Oak Street
.....rmington. MN 55024
A Proud Past - A P~ '$'111 Future
Committed to Providl Hfg6 Qpallty,
Timely and Responsive e 'e to All
Of. Our Cust ers
AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
May 10, 2005
7:00 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
a) April 12, 2005
3. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a)
b)
'-tiCl
d)
Bristol Square 5th Addition Preliminary 8: Final Plat
Applicant: SAS Development, LLC
Middle Creek East 3rd Addition Amendment to the Planned. Unit Development
Preliminary 8: Final Plat Review '
Applicant: D R Horton "
Executive Estates Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezone. and p,)m1nary PI
Applicant: ColIn GaNey r
Mystic Meadows Preliminary Plat (con't) I
Applicant: Giles Properties, Inc. i
Tamarack Ridge 4th Addition Final Plat (Site Plan Reviews - Roundba k, V.ariance
foot front yard setback along a minor collector, Tamarack Ridge Ret il Center)
Applicant: Jim Ostenson 1 Farmington Severson, L.P.
e)
f)
Hometown Addition Preliminary Plat, Variance to the maximum cul de-sac length f 600 feet
(con't)
Applicant: Kim Friedrich
Amend Section 10-2-1 of the Zoning Code to Include a Definition f r Bus and Tr
and Amend Section 10-5-21 (c) Subdivision 2 of the Zoning Code 0 Indude B
Terminal as a Conditional Use in the IP (Industrial Park) Zoning Dist ct
Text Amendment Regarding Signs for Nonresidential Uses in the A-1 istrict
g)
h)
4. DISCUSSION
--
~'
a)
Site Plan Review- LSI Holdings - Industrial Park
MUSA Review Committee Recommendation
b)
5. ADJOURN
\
.
.
.
b
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463.2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO:
Planning Commission ~U
FROM:
Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
Middle Creek East 3rd Addition Amendment to the Planned Unit
Development, Rezone, and Preliminary & Final Plat Review
SUBJECT:
DATE:
May 10, 2005
INTRODUCTION
D R Horton has submitted applications for an Amendment to the Planned Unit Development,
Rezone, and Preliminary & Final Plat review for the property located south of 203rd Street and
east of Eastview Avenue. The proposal for the property consists of 26 single-family lots on
10.69 acres (Exhibit A).
DISCUSSION
The Middle Creek Planned Unit Development (PUD) was approved by the City Council on
February 7, 2000. The PUD proposed the eastern section of Middle Creek for 4-unit multi-
family buildings designating the PUD in this area for Medium Density Residential (Exhibit B).
The Middle Creek East Preliminary Plat was approved by the City Council on July 15, 2002
(Exhibit C).
Proposed Amendment to the Middle Creek East PUD
The Developer proposes to construct 26 single-family lots on a minimum of 10,000 square-foot
lots within the location where Medium Density Residential was originally approved by the City
Council on February 7,2000. The portion currently being proposed for single-family units was
originally proposed for fifteen 4-unit buildings totaling 60 units. However, because of the
overabundance of multi-family units in this area, the developer chose to revise the PUD to allow
single-family units similar to the Pine Knoll neighborhood adjacent to the Middle Creek East 3rd
Addition.
The overall gross density for the proposal is 2.43 units/acre and the net density excluding the
outlots and right-of-way is 2.91 units/acre. The setbacks for the single-family homes are
proposed at 20 feet in the front and 6 feet on the side and rear yards. Comer lots are proposed
with a 20-foot setback from the street. The minimum lot width is 80 feet and the minimum
building pad is 60' x 60'.
. Zoning
The underlying zoning in this location is currently R-3, allowing for Medium Density
Residential with a allowable net density of 8.5 units/acre. The developer requests to
rezone the property east of Eastview Avenue and south of 206th Street as R-l (Low
Density Residential) to comply with the amendment to the Planned Unit Development.
Middle Creek East 3rd Addition Preliminary & Final Plat
As shown on the plat, the developer proposes twenty-six (26) single-family residential lots on
10.69 acres with a gross density of 2.43 units/acre. The net density excluding the outlots and
right-of-way is 2.91 units/acre. The lots range from 10,388 square feet to 31,960 square feet in
size (Exhibit D). The average lot size is approximately 14,962 square feet.
Multi-family townhomes are proposed to the west of Middle Creek East 3rd Addition. An
existing single-family development (Pine Knoll) exists to the north (Exhibit), and a 10-acre
protected wetland to the east.
Transportation
.
The developer proposes to extend 206th Street to the east through the single-family development
and loop the street (East Oaks Drive) to connect with Eastview Avenue on the south end of the
plat. East Oaks Drive will be constructed at 28 feet in width within a 60- foot right-of-way. Per
the City's Engineering Plate (STR-05A), a sidewalk is required one side of the street. The
developer proposes to locate this required sidewalk on the east side of East Oaks Drive.
Access from the Middle Creek East 3rd Addition development will be to the north on Eastview
Avenue (existing 38-foot wide street within a 70-foot right-of-way) or to the west on 206th Street
(existing 32-foot wide street within a 60-foot right-of-way) or west onto Cypress Drive
(proposed 22-foot wide private street to be constructed in the Middle Creek East 2nd Addition).
A dead end street at the southern end of Eastview Avenue will be allowed with the City's
standard "Through Street" sign installed at the end of the street (Exhibit F). The dead end will
be allowed because East Oaks Avenue forms a looped street at the southern edge of this plat
providing looped traffic for both the Fire Department and the Solid Waste Department.
Sanitary Sewer
During the PUD portion of planning the Middle Creek subdivision, the City discussed the
possibility that the developer of Middle Creek prepare plans to assist in removing the existing lift
station on Eaves Way through a gravity sanitary sewer line installed through Middle Creek 3rd
Addition and the rear lots of two existing homes in the Pine Knoll subdivision (Exhibit G). The
layout for the pipe through the existing rear lots is proposed in order to allow for adequate cover
for the line without encroaching/filling the protected wetland east of Middle Creek East 3rd
Addition. City staff is currently working on easement acquisition for these two properties in
. Pine Knoll and the layout of the sanitary sewer line to the lift station.
.
.
Parks and Trails
Randy Distad, Parks & Recreation Director has submitted a memo concerning the park and trail
requirement for Middle Creek East 3rd Addition (Exhibit H). The Parks & Recreation
Commission (PRAC) reviewed the plat on April 13, 2005 and approved the trail locations. A
trail is proposed along the east side of the plat adjacent to the proposed rear lot lines in Block 1.
The Engineering Division has requested that the trail be located directly along the rear lot lines in
order to form a boundary between the residential lots and the wetland buffer because of
encroachment issues with homeowners in the past. Therefore, the developer should relocate the
trail in the wetland to directly behind the rear lot lines in Block 1. However, since there is an
existing grove of large trees directly behind Lot 14 Block 1 (Exhibit Q, the developer will locate
the trail further to the east to keep the existing trees and then bring the trail back to the rear lot
line behind Lot 13. PRAC is recommending that no land be dedicated for a park and instead the
City will take cash in lieu of land since Meadow Creek Park abuts this plat.
Wetland
The wetland east of Middle Creek East 3rd Addition is a protected wetland and no encroachment
of any structure is allowed. Trails are allowed within the 75-foot wide wetland buffer.
Additionally, wetland buffer signs will be installed by the developer every 300 feet along the east
side of the trail.
Engineering
Engineering has recommended approval of the Middle Creek East 3rd Addition Preliminary and
Final Plat contingent to any engineering comments.
ACTION REQUESTED
I. Recommend approval of the Middle Creek PUD/Schematic Plan from Medium Density
Residential to Low Density Residential area and forward the recommendation to the City
Council.
2. Recommend approval of the rezoning of the property from R-3 (Medium Density
Residential) to R-I (Low Density Residential) and forward the recommendation to the
City Council.
3. Recommend approval of the Middle Creek East 3rd Addition Preliminary and Final Plat
contingent to any engineering comments and forward the recommendation to the City
Council.
:;;;~
Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
. cc: D R Horton, Inc.
.
.
.
-,
I '"
I :.,
: ~~
: ~..
\--
l"
~s
m~
5
<n
t;)
4L ('I~
..'~
\..d ~.,
,
l(ll'l
~VI
.,
z
o
I-
o
o
<(
~
->
1--
(f)
",C
LIJ
\-0
,;~I"'-
.."""
.-COed
~~ ~~~
"'j. 4"'
onllt
"
,
"
,
-,
_J
c::
r'\
V
"
"
"
,'I
"
"
g-XII /0/1
.4
e~~
~lDai
I~~
<l
I
I
I \...)>
\,)>
\..)>
,~>
C{~
)
\
L
\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
\
\
\
\
\ -
V ",---:",;0
....-<,\ S''\,.......
nO'G \ \ I/"'#(
...~ ~---
.r! ~
.~I ~
~I ~
!:Lll
it
.-1
p....,l
'<
-~/
~Il
,,<--
C)
C)
f_'
/
~~
5~ ~
~~ €Q~~~
F= >-~~~~a
~i5;O z r,i<liP
~il- :".ll!a~~.
~ti~ ;~~~~$~
::I~~ ~.c:::IJ:V1li'"
eiSUl m~~ltJ"'l!lim
Q~~ I ~:s~~2
~tJCl ~Qj;a.!l:I)(i
~~t ~~~~I!=:J:W
1d~~ :~;~~~g
<~<( ~a:::)-l~~~
:gUw ::Ii I ~<~->-
zl-~ ~~:Iij;G:lI:llD
!i~z :iF!!:ii5~ Iil
lI:l8S! o~~- ~~
zll,..;i~m~
/
~'7
;'
-7
-'-
g
~
5
~
~
Q
Z
e
~
~
o
1--
L.J
;)
o
o
"
S'J
->
-7
-'-
C'4
o
<;(
<(
1--
Iii
::J
~i=
~i
::JO
~~
<'" -
'" - -
~< r
<V1 .
z....
<ffi
"':2
0",
~
~"l:I X
S..i
f1!~
.sz.Olll<)
'V.~ "'"
i~!.!
C1.!!-o 3
.. CI .
t~~~i
:6i~.s
..!~~:!15
:.~: ii
ji2J~
(,')
<(
LlJ
~~
LtJ
~:
LIJ
Ld
Q:::
u
r---n-4 ~~-
I' : nl ~
r ~!.: I .',~,
i ,,~:' L,_ ,,~, I ~
l-~.- ~ 1:;~
! n_'I~__n ,~~
, h:~
I : "'f f
: "\!. I "'0:. I ~-'
L ,,1.'" '~" 0
_____...:L ; r;
___u-.-J ~
Ld
o
o
~~
\'
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
~i
l(l Ii;
~
o '"
~
~
\
~;
Vi~V.:l ^Hd~nVi
.
jen~
~~~
qF=::!
)( =!CF=
tY C1.g~
Q
~ (,) (,)
F=aF=
9 <z<
::IF=::I
tYen!.J
:r iS~~
en en 101 en
~~...;
.
<(
.-
,0
~~~
o::::::>z
<a.:z
l.1... -
u~
>--
II-z
0...<(0
o:::~.-
::)w'-'
~IZ
u-
(f)~
0:::
<(
l.1...
.
E;{I!J J3IT 13
......:z
~i ~
hi! ~
"~'J'i'
P-;'~'l
~dj~x=-
C \I ... .. ... . I .,
, . , , t , . .
~
I 1 !
a .. ==
" 'f I
ill
1 ! ~
J I J
I i J
! G
i :
&
I ~tf Z ~ * ! :: n ,
! I I I I I, oi Q) ~
I *i'P ! ~ 111_9 I
i I I f I I . a
ff]r;,
~
::II
a
j:
<
<.J
o
~
i
-i%
i-::,
"';1;
,Iii;~
assll
~Hn
c:c:c:::c:
122$1::
~
..
i
II
!Iii
~a~
al~; I a~
~ ~3: ~ ~~
~ ~~~ h~
.a
i!;-
"i'1'
il'i~;
ClOO~!
iiil~
c:t:c:::
2~2~~
~~
-~
i le1!!
. ~~
! c:;:~
2~U
t: _:j;;
"'c::....f" QO
hii;~'~~
~
0:
~
~
~
~
i
--___l__~_____..____.
lS'v'3 >l33C10 3100lri
GXII/I3/1 {/
.
'J'~'~'" 13..,.:,..,'
....._.-.~..
"""''''<i:
....
cn
w
i:i
w
~"-,5"
~
o
e
:::E
\~..,-
"
I
1
I
I
1
...--
\
&
I;;'"~
~n
~",h
~i~ln~
Vl IHI:H
13 ~~~u
~ ~Un
f- .. tttt:t:
tx . fHU~ 5Uf;
.
~
~
~<
~\
~~l\
~~~al
-~~
~~~
~
I-
I-([)O
([)z
<(<(
W---1Z
o..z
~ -
W~~
W Ct: ..
Ct:~Z
OZO
W~I-
---1-t?
0---1Z
W-
OCt:~
~o..~
~
LL
--
!, :n i
t ~I
z
:s
0..
w
'HH' ~
cn13ZZ;;:; cn
ZF660 0
!:(o:::J<<< Z
~~g~~~ :s
i~~~1;:~~~~~
ili~~~n~iil~::!
ii~i~~~~~~
"':N..;"':.n.or'tdaig
.
"
~
~~~
..,:l1i...,
!~i I ..
~~I li~;
~!~ ~~
~ ~~~ ~~~
~ 8~ -
~ ~:
u"
~gi ~ ;
~12 ~ ~~
trkllJ .... 1:10
0:11:::1 U '\1(0)
:t~~ ;! a.~
~~~ ~ g~
oj
I
! I!I
> ;I
" 0
~ ~o-
< i!~
i :ll:f
~ ~
i ;
~ ~
"-
<( -
~
6 i
F
<(
o
o
-'
t-
en
<(
W
'"
~
~
i
rJ
Z
oll-
'....
~~
z-@j
~~
Ow
IO
";6
00
'"
f
J ~
~ ili
, ~
~ 8
I ~
f .
. ..
Ii
~ ,q
I !
~q
i ~ .
Ii! i'"
!;III~l
~M': c.:_
J I
Il
l
11
r
U.
'II
II
..
J,
,.!
tl!
Iii
ill
ill
!ll
i
I i
II! !
Iii!!
;1:/1
,I
II,
a:~ I
III),
.~~
: ii ~
It...il
~X!llt!-rr E)
.
.r!
'~I
~I
t:I,.:l1
~I
!I
p..,g
::.
&
N~
Z
0 ::.
f-
-
0
0
<(
0
0::: VI
r<) i\!
'-'
'"
..
f- I r ~
() ..: 0/n
(f) t- o:: ~ II ~ ~
<(
W :::;
<( ~ :::; ;~~~ &
. (/) ::> co5
W (/) 01""1"--
<( <( ~~uir-i d
W -[ II n ::.
~ a::: 0:: II?~~ UJ
<(
<( ~~~~ > ::.
W <t(E...N a: it
W ..J..J:lI:::::'::: 0 I'N
<('I(UU ;Ii
....1-00
0:::: oO..J~ f/) i
f"-~CCID
~.
U <(~
og ::.
&
W 00"
~
-.J !i
0 ::.
0
-
2
::.
I')
&
N"
~
:i
.
~ ~ ~ t
Ir: ~ ~ t: ~ ~
~~ilP~ tl~ p~s ~
~~ ~~"~.;~" g~ffi:O "
...~~~z ~~~~~3~~~ ~~~!2lj~ It:ii!f
:> !::! .. . 0 f'f _Z 1: ~ aI ~ ~ ~ ,... III 8 (J ~ III ~ 1:1
O ~~"'~~ :~88~~Q~S~~~~i~-1~~~~~lS~
<>a~2 i1iilijg:gao~ ~"'I()ol ~~! ~O::~<;
Z ~~5~~ ~~~~~~d~~t~t~aP~"U:~
W ""1 ~~~~~:~~~I~;'~''''~~~''I~
~ 11'H t t ~ ~ ) \ ! \ I! l:, I +~ ~ ~Wlir(
~ *j.t ry ! t f ({ I U ( II :~ Ilnrtllll i
~ I I 1 I
.
.
\,~
r/).
z~
g~
t:~<
O~~
O~O
<gzr/).
O~~
~r/).~
~O~
r/). ~ ~
<~z
~~o
~t:~
~dd
~~~
fj~~
~6~
O~~
eO
~~
d
.
III ~~
~ ~ ~ ~ 15 <g~~~~
'0 '0 'd. 6 6 ~e~~~~
<>: gj gj~ 0 0 ::c::cJ1l"H'H'"
~~ ~ ~5<>: <>: ~ ~ :z::c~~~~
J1l~ ~~~.~ ~ z Z fo'fo'OOOO
I ~~~~~~igj~~i8~8i~~!5~~~
<>:<0<0<<::; ~<!;;.!;;<~[2~::;j::;j::;j
!;; ~ ~I~~~~~I~~~~~~~~~~~~
~N tti ~ vi ~ r--: 00 o\;:!::~~~
...l...l
~~ F>(I!I!3ff ~
00
uu
~~
~~
OO~
~~~
~::c~
000
~~~ .
~~i>:l ~
000
g
<
Cl
<>:<
~I
~,
~~
~~
~L
Cl
~
:'!
~
15
~
g
...l
....:M~
666
....:z: _
III ~
]~ ~~ d rj ,
~:I~ :I~ ~ ~i
~ ~;jl!l;jl!l -t"
I ~ ; il ffi; ~;I
I ~ Q ~5~ i~; ~~~
~ u~ li~ ~i~
o
~~ ~ m
~,"'I u ~
gil~ ~I; ~
~a~j 8 ~~
/
/
i
i,
~ . .
. ~ ~
~~
~\X
~ 1t .-u
\:~ \j'\ \l'
A j
I
I
J
~ ~
~
13
i:J
/:
"
,..
III
!
d
till
Hli
Hll
ii-j
f:!j
i
=U
Iti
!
~
0:
~
1iI 12
~ I b ~
.~ 'b~ :'b~
~,..Ni !G~
Ul- I lie liE
~~~~~!~h
n~d~~ii
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.e
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
NOTE:
BARRICADE AS PER FARMINGTON
STANDARD DETAIL PLATE STR-24
8' -0"
,2'-0" 4'-0"
FUTURE THROUGH
STREET.
:: UTURE CONNECTlO
0 . MAY RESULT IN
C INCREASED
I E TRAFFIC.
~
L{)
::
ex:> c
I E
-
N
x. Ground
Fill/err r
1/2"x4-1/2" Galvanized
Bolts with Cut Washers
(Carriage, Hex. or Sq.)
s' steel
channel posts
with standard
weight of
3 Ibs/ft
NOTES:
1. Design shall conform to these
requirements except as otherwise
approved by the city engineer.
2. Sign shall be reflectorized as per
MNDOT 3352.2A2b, standard No. 2
3. Sign shall be constructed of aluminum
per MNDOT 3352.2A 1, black on white
with 4" letters.
Nominal
8"xS' -a"
Aluminum
4S"
CD
to
FUTURE THROUGH
STREET.
FUTURE CONNECTIO
MAY RESULT IN
INCREASED
TRAFFIC.
2"l-
,--
7"~
7"~
1 "
--------
STANDARD DETAILS
FUTURE THROUGH STREET SIGN
Lost Revision:
Jan 2004
City Plate No.
( FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA J STR-24A
H:\STANDARDS\STANDARD PLATES\STR-29.DWG
.
// /' /
/(/ //
, I
I
,,' '-Klttz:?!f"cr,"
I t:;l {JJ
B1lUMINOUS lRAlL BY OlHERS
en
w
>
~
W
~-_.~
l" (/
1 '\J
~
.
-
-
-
-----
.:.';;.:.;:
./.::'
.
"-.
'~
Rengineenng
CMLBMCllNI!I!ItS l..AND1'LAHNI!IlI LANDsmtVE'l'Cti 1ANDS~~0lItIICn
,/"
Mendola Heights Office
201 aSlb.AlfIIlIaN.W.
COClIl. bpilb, MN SS433
(7ii)) 713-J&80 F_:7I>-11I3
J hereby ccnifydw Ibis pllll_~ by
me oru.ndcrlllydim:asupervisimmdlhlll Name
alllldulyLi~ProfcssicINI~
llndcrlhebwl oflhe S1aeofMnaesou
Revimn>
2m Emerprille tJriYC
MClldDlaHciprs,MNSSl2O
(651)61J.1914 fu:681-9488
...cllbA.WiDcnl:Jm&
Rq.No. ~ o.~
.
.
.
~Xfl181T ;-/
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO:
Lee Smick, City Planner
FROM:
Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director
RE:
Comments on Middle Creek East 3rd Addition Preliminary and Final Plat
DATE:
April 20, 2005
BACKGROUND
The Park and Recreation Advisory Commission (PRAC) reviewed the Middle Creek East 3rd
Addition Preliminary and Final Plat (the Plat) at its April 13, 2005 meeting.
DISCUSSION
The PRAC reviewed the Plat for trail and park locations. The PRAC is recommending to the
Planning Commission that the Plat be approved with the trail locations that are identified since
they meet.the location of trails that were identified during the Middle Creek Park Master
Planning process. The PRAC is recommending that no land be dedicated for a park and instead
the City should take cash in lieu of land since Middle Creek Park abuts this development.
RECOMMENDATION:
The PRAC recommends to the Planning Commission that the Preliminary and Final Plat fO,r
Middle Creek East Third Addition be approved with the trail locations that have been identified
0fu11Y Stf~tt~d. /7
~~g~
R~Y Distad
Parks and Recreation Director
cc: Park and Recreation Advisory Commission Members
____I
.
~
.
.
/
. ~_';'J
.
!
i
);<
. .
i t ~
iJ ~ !
t- I ~
-t . 1i
i' .. ..
!i ! ~
~1 I 1
II f .
L1,r i
z A'
III
~ Ii ~ t
F 1 1 j
i ,J , i
,.Ii , I
~]I ;-
o
t'xll/!3)rI' ~i
;S~
~z
~I
U~
",'
...
o
o
51
j t,l~f~i 11
1 1 .! ~ Ii! 1 I~ ;
i f ~ l ! I l ~ ii t
J 'jl-Jij"
; ; I · 1 ~ ! ; ;h f
! 1 jIg I I t ~d ~
j ;; f J. f Ii!.'
j i ! J it. .Ii 1
" i. I I i I I ~ i .H! ;;
;; .~; , ':;; In" j" ~
! U! i Hun !~p
In 1 I" I ~ 11 1.1 I' lJ j I
~ I Ai A !~ ~ j;< AI !: 111 1
i' j 1 I~ ~ .' l. Ii 'I I
dJ tH III ~i ,~ J I! h i ~
~ H !t i i~ i h !~. l H ! ' 0:
~ .1 .0 'I oJ 0 !. .t ~! ~f~.1 E
, ,,' ,l I .3 10 -;1 IJ! 1& t5
tIl
o
~
...
;d~
o[j~
~8~
~;i
~~~
dl~
.
Bl
d . !
l:l
!
! j
{i i i
11';1
1l1i,
H~j
lh~
j!jj
.:.'
! I i1
g .
~ 1Il
~
Ii I I I I
.
~~~
!l I!i
~z ~ i l! ~ ,~! iH
i II! ! i ~! .~!
I s I! i .~! ~
J ~q
~H
lit I ~ 1 ~l
J J ~ ~ J A-. L!l
~!'
. ~;~
~!~
~
to.. \of 'l..
!;; w
::l ~
.. g
~ i
II
..
,
II
II
II
I
I
I
..
Ie,"
'P.
I
I
I
I
.
Ie
I
I
CITY NATURAL AREA
PROTECTED
CONSERVATION AREA
The plantiDgs iIl1hio area ccmlaiIllllllive
trees, floweriDg plams, shrubs lIIId grasses
lbat provide tilocl for birds, fish lIIId olher
IIlIlive wildlife. The plants also help to
hold soiIlIIId preveot erosioD, improve
water quality IIIld provide D8IImII babilals
for auima1s. UIllIer City Wetland
0rdlDaDce No. 10-9-2, DO cleariDg or
rIlDll>Va! ofvegelalilm in the bulier lIIOa
is allowed. Dead ttees or br.mclIcs
provide =eIleot hahiUlt for II8live .
wildlife IIIld should DOt be IeIIlOVeci .
1Iom the wet1and bulier.
WETLAND BUFFER
This is a prote<:t<>cl Natutal AIea. The IIlIlive
plantiDga iIl1hio area provide shoreline olabilization
for the poods, redw;e erosioD, improve water
quality by filtering poU_. lIIId
provide a D8IImII habiUlt for wildlife.
Under City 0rdiDlmce, property a4jacent to
ponds should be left ill a D8IImII slate IIIld
DO mowiIlg or cleariDg ofvcgetalion iIl1hio
area may occur. Dead ttees or br.mclIcs IIIld
native grasses provide an """"llont habitat for
Dative wildlife adjaceot to ponds and
should DOt be =ved 1iom the D8IImII .
area. No vehicular tndIic of I
any kiDd is allowed.
The II8live tteeslllld plantiDga in 1hio city-owncd
area provide a D8IImII habitat for wildlife lIIId
preveat erosion of steep slopes. Under City
0rdiDlmce, Gltisting plant malCrial within this
conservation ..... should be left in . natural slate
lIIId DO clearing or rIlDll>Va! of
vegetation in 1hio area may
oceut. Dead ttees or br.mclIcs
provide c:xcelleot habitat
for IIlIlive wildlife and
should DOt be IeIIlOVeci
1iom the CCIIlOenIlItioI area.
~
~
1W1l7Jf
NOTE: ALL SIGNS SHALL BE OBTAINED FROM THE CITY ENGINEER
ST ANDARD DET AILS
CONSERV A TION AREA) W'ETLAND BUFFER)
AND CITY NATURAL AREA SIGNS
Lo.st Revisio :
JAN. 2002
( FARMINGTON) MINNESOT A J GEN-13
H:\ST ANDARD PLA TES\GEN-13.DVlG
.
.
.
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
SUBJECT:
Executive Estates Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezone, and
Preliminary Plat Review
DATE:
May 10, 2005
INTRODUCTION
Ms. Judith Empey, owner and Mr. Colin Garvey, developer have jointly submitted applications
for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezone, and Preliminary Plat review for the property
located east of TH 3 and north of 225th Street. The proposal for the property consists of 98
single-family lots on 47.43 acres (Exhibit A).
DISCUSSION
Annexation
The City Council approved the annexation ordinance for the Empey property at its meeting on
September 7,2004. The property was approved by the Municipal Boundary Adjustment Office
on November 10, 2004 (004-517).
Metropolitan Urban Service Area
On August 16, 2004, the City Council approved MUSA for the Empey property contingent upon
annexation into the City. Since the property has been annexed, the property has MUSA. ,
Comprehensive Plan
The property does not currently have a Comprehensive Plan land use designation. Based on the
proposed land use by the developer and adjacent land use to the south of the property, the Low
Density Residential designation would be appropriate for the Empey property. Therefore, the
developer requests to amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan from Non-Designated to Low
Density Residential.
.
.
.
Zoning
The property is currently zoned A-I as per the following City Code requirement:
10-4-3: ANNEXATION AND DESIGNATION OF LAND:
(A) Land areas which may be added to the city by annexation, merger or other
means shall be classified A-I agriculture until such time that the city council may
rezone the added territory to more appropriate classifications. (Ord. 002-469, 2-
19-2002)
The developer requests to rezone the Empey property from A-I to R-I (Low Density
Residential) to comply with the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment proposal.
Executive Estates Preliminary Plat
As shown on the plat (Exhibit A), the developer proposes ninety-eight (98) single-family
residential lots on 47.43 acres with a gross density of2.06 units/acre. The lots are mostly 10,000
square feet in size with larger lots surrounding the cul-de-sacs.
There are two access points to the south that intersect with 22Sth Street. Additionally, an access
to the north through the Tollefson property is proposed. Staff has also recommended an access
to the west through the Tollefson property to provide adequate traffic dispersal throughout both
properties. The plat needs to reflect this recommendation.
Staff has required that the developer pave 22Sth Street from TH 3 to the 2nd entrance to the
Executive Estates property. Castle Rock has requested that the developer pave 22Sth Street to the
easterly border of the Executive Estates property (see attached letter from Castle Rock
Township, which includes additional comments on the Preliminary Plat).
Parks and Trails
Randy Distad, Parks & Recreation Director, has submitted the recommendations for a park and
trails/sidewalks for the development (Exhibit B). A 3.6-acre park is proposed in the northeast
comer of the property adjacent to the existing wetland. Trails and sidewalks are recommend '
throughout the project.
Engineering
The Engineering Division has reviewed the preliminary plat and has determined that the
information submitted is incomplete. Additional information needs to be submitted on grading,
utilities, and transportation. Therefore, staff recommends that the preliminary plat be continued.
ACTION REQUESTED
1. Recommend approval of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment designating the
property from Non-Designated to Low Density Residential and forward the
recommendation to the City Council.
.
.
.
2. Recommend approval of the rezoning of the property from A-I (Agriculture) to R-I
(Low Density Residential) and forward the recommendation to the City Council.
3. Continue the Executive Estates Preliminary Plat to the next scheduled Planning
Commission meeting, and provide comments (if desired) on park and trail issues or other
aspects of the Preliminary Plat.
Respectfully submitted,
Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
cc: Colin Garvey
Castle Rock Township
.
.
.
"D
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO:
Planning Commission
\;fC/
FROM:
Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
SUBJECT:
Mystic Meadows 1st Addition Preliminary Plat
DATE:
May 10, 2005
INTRODUCTIONIDISCUSSION
The Developer has requested additional time to address floodplain issues and right-of-
way requirements for 195th Street; therefore, the Developer requests that the Planning
Commission continue the public hearing to the next scheduled meeting. The 120-day
deadline to approve the preliminary plat is July 7,2005.
However, the developer would like to discuss the trail and sidewalk recommendations
from the Parks & Recreation Commission. Attached, is a memo from Parks &
Recreation Director Randy Distad discussing these recommendations.
ACTION REQUESTED
Continue the public hearing to the next scheduled meeting.
Respectfully Submitted,
(ld~
Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
cc: John Anderson, Giles Properties, Inc.
.
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO:
Farmington Planning Commission
FROM:
Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director
RE:
Mystic Meadow Preliminary Plat Park and Trail Comments
DATE:
May 5,2005
BACKGROUND:
A Preliminary Plat has been submitted for Mystic Meadows.
.
DISCUSSION:
The Park and Recreation Advisory Commission held a special meeting on Wednesday,
April 27, 2005 to provide an opportunity for the developer to speak to PRAC members
about the trail and sidewalk locations that the PRAC had previously recommended to the
developer. Most of the discussion centered on where the trails should or shouldn't be
located. After much discussion the PRAC approved recommending to the Planning
Commission that the trail and sidewalk shown in Exhibit A should be constructed in
these locations. The PRAC selected the trail and sidewalk locations for the following
reasons:
1. The City's Comprehensive Plan's Parks and Recreation Chapter identifies on the
Existing and Proposed Park, Trails and Open Space Plan Map (Plan Map) and
shown in Exhibit B, the location of a network of trails that should be constructed
in this part of the City. The trails do not exactly fit the locations identified on the
Plan Map because of a large pond that is being proposed to be dug in the
development. Because ofthis large pond, the trails had to routed around the large
pond.
2. Providing trails around a majority of the perimeter of the pond provides many
looping trail opportunities that creates a variety of scenery. It takes advantage of
natural spaces in and around the large pond and the PRAC feels that it is
important that as much as possible trails should be located in and around natural
areas.
3. The PRAC feels that, it is important to make the large pond and natural areas
around the pond as accessible as possible to all community residents.
4. It provides a variety of trail experiences that wouldn't be possible if the trails
were only constructed in the front ofthe homes.
.
.
.
.
5. Since the PRAC is not taking land for park dedication in this phase ofthe
development, it provides for short term recreational opportunities for the residents
who will be living in this first phase of the development.
6. The trail locations account for safe crossings at intersections as much as possible.
7. The PRAC has provided the developer the opportunity to have cuI de sac lots
without trails behind the lots.
8. While not a reason for the PRAC recommendation, the trails provide needed
access for City staffto perform pond maintenance when it is needed.
ACTION REQUESTED:
The PRAC is requesting that the Planning Commission approve the trail and sidewalk
locations that are shown in Exhibit A.
~lYm
Randy Distad,
Parks and Recreation Director
cc: Park and Recreation Advisory Commission Members
51:10AiI^,wns . SJ.SIJ.HlIl:>S . SlIilNHYld .S\lillINIONiI
S~~YI~OSSY NOSS'O
~
:pau5lS
saaz VlOS3NNlri 'N01~Nlri~V.i N~
~o
31'9'0 3u~o~
NOlllaaV lS~1.i :..:qm~~ I-L....
SMOaV3ri :::>11SAri t::JO
:HL :I:~
133HS ~3^O:::> SNVld 3dV:::>SaNVl VII
c.:>
:li '10~lNO:::> NOISO~3 '3~VNIV~a '~NlaV~~ ~~ ~[i
--
~.Irm$lfII.~.S\II'5HW'.ll.CICJt'W"IC/O.'Il<<lZIIIf
_II'. (EM)Wj ..UtO-It' (EM) .. WWll"~ "Il<<D .. on:l1M"lS lutJCI$ w ~ 0lMI
lrrrt 'ON '5a~~
uosJapu\!, 'S UOPUOJ8
'O\0.9UU!t'i jO 9\0\S 941 jO ."'01 "41
Ji;lipUn J~~U!f)U3 IOUO!SS~JOJd p~SU~:l!'
.(Jnp 0 wo I l04l pUO UOlslAJadns
l09JlP ,(W J9pUn JO 9W ,(q pSJodsJd
so", UOld .141 104\ "'II1JO, "'QOJ04 I
.::J. 's V") ..il
o _ .-:;::S, V'l .~ '""=l' \ ^ ~,
~ .~ _ o.;;j 'C V) ';,.;;;
· ....,~ '-' <;:..,) 0 - <::!-
g 8 ~ c: ';;',)~ -''-,0
i ~ 8~-t-> "" ~ ~ ~~ '~~:::"7'- \~ ~~
Zl--~ N~ .--.J) .... .'r-' ~r-
, '" '" ---0 '>.. \i~ 9 -,- -
I ~ ~~ ~ ,0 - -+ 6 ~ ~ JS ~ . ,1.1
i 0 8... -+ ~~ -3 -':S.-:.U ~ ,~ ~
! u ($ A-o ~ .,~ ~ 11. ~
I ~~ ~~~V)CL ~
I /:_::_/_/_j/"-cc
I ,d' >:~<.
).__..~~:c:;;52;;r:::"'< --
~
,,---,;
.-,
, .-.,/'
, '
-+-
1-
~
: .'
w
~8).~
J'.., \/-'<--.
. / \ -
. ....,.. '......_-_\
'1.'''''''''':1
/
',.. .I
.." i
.j"
/
./
i
>'/
"/
./
/
/
........
/
,/
./
,~
"\
'I,
\\ .
.\~ .
(/
'. zw
j"-)
-'...-,,;';
......-_1 :
"1,
\
..
..
\ ,
'J
~\.
v'
,-...-------
,
..,
,
,
,
,
,
(
\
{ ,"1___
\, ;;' \" 1\
..::....-...l) '\
Lj '---.,~}
----!i~----..\
\
;
I
.....~ji
1-
/
,
,
,
\
\
,
,
,
,
I
)
. /,/'
'.,
L<J
Ill,
-<
:I:
ll..
~
~
-<
ll..
L<J
~
::>
t-
::>
Lo.
,..-----
,
,
,
,
,
1
\
1
\,
\:
,/
c:::":.\
"'-"" -
~.
l>---->C'
...'"
oeo
llici
0....
-'"
r:::.:;;
~1f)
Zw
1:.1 :il'li,:,'ti;i;,~~~~~~~~~::I~'liil~~f)~:~~;i~1=! . . , Ii
. . ~~~"..
~III 'I:: ,; "
,il "I,: l .. ,';;:;:~: /
:: 'i:' ':'::;"'1 ':,;,~':,":' 'L,,): l!,:.,,: ::/,,;;r-' ;:,';/:;~/f(: ~>,:. "S,. ,;;, \;,::'.,. ),:},;':\\ _,I :'I,:I:,i ':I"'X,l
j' :.1 '" II, '" 'II '-,,"'-', , I" ""/' " '-, ~'\ " "".,',:' '1111"'1..,,"',',,:11" 'J""!""'-'-' II
" II. ..:'" -';;!;;,--; ~"I r.r ~'1' .< '.,.s:: t,'j',t ~:; , -<. \ : \.,;,..,,,'H;,,;:N::{<,>,~: ill 'il,I';'1j' I~L
~:g
~~
eo'"
"'::;:
-'"
Zw
I-
'.::(
.. ' . ,--:---------~~-~;;;//s;N;~,-
------------: -
.. .... ,.-, ._-~~-f!i--~ t:;, ': ");1.
U!DldpoOlj ~'U:J 41JON
V8-1VNLJ-1t0,0 1-~N3
lUOJ-~j 3SV8L091 dV!'iA asoq pJb-j>Olqal!il-"Xll 'Sj3MX wd,O:1 <;OOl '9Z Jdv :31VO
uOOJapuoq :~3sn b.P'NIVldOOOlFl<; 10<;\ bu!pOJ~\ b.P\IOU!j\ UOldpuOl\l<;lO<;OOl\ 'lOa! OJd\ :j :~o
.
.
.
Ex h-, b'; + \b
Existing and Proposed Park,
Trail, and Open Space Plan Map
,/-'-
f'
flWi
3
N
W+E
"
...,.,
'~ ~~i
.,
::1l
~. '-~~
, v- :<: ~
f..:- ~
"
.4
s
Created on April 9, 2004
Revised on June 10, 2004
Revised on September 10, 2004
.
.
.
.
.
.
e
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO:
PI . C .. \~U
annmg ommlSSlon ~
FROM:
Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
SUBJECT:
Tamarack Ridge 4th Addition Final Plat
DATE:
May 10, 2005
INTRODUCTION
Jim Ostenson, Farmington Severson L.P., proposes to develop 4.2 acres of commercially
zoned property east of Trunk Highway 3, south of County Road 66, and north of 209th
Street within the Tamarack Ridge development (Exhibit A). The Tamarack Ridge 4th
Addition Final Plat is the last phase of the development that included 73 single-family
lots and 134 multifamily townhome units. The 4.2 acres is zoned B-1 and allows uses
within the Highway Business District (Exhibit B).
DISCUSSION
The City Council approved the Tamarack Ridge Preliminary Plat on May 15, 2000
(Exhibit C) after approval of an R-3 Planned Unit Development on February 7,2000.
The developer proposes to plat two lots and outlot the remaining lot for future
development. Lot 1 Block 1 consists of 1.57 acres and is located at the southeast
intersection of CSAH 66 and TH 3. There is no access onto these two arterial roadways.
Access for this lot will be provided by Cascade Drive from the north and a private street
to the south intersecting with 209th Street.
Lot 2 Block 1 consists of 2.6 acres and is located at the northeast intersection of 209th
Street and TH 3. Access for this lot will be directly onto 209th Street. Outlot A consists
of 0.9 acres and is proposed for future commercial development. A storm water pond
exists adjacent to Outlot A to the east and the facility will provide a drainage area for the
two platted lots.
Transportation
Because of Dakota County and MnDOT's access requirements, no direct access onto
CSAH 66 or TH 3 from the platted lots is allowed. Access to the lots will be from the
existing Cascade Drive and a proposed private road that will be located along the east
side ofthe plat that will intersect with 209th Street to the south (Exhibit D).
Parks and Trails
.
Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director has submitted a trail plan for the Tamarack
Ridge 4th Addition Final Plat. As shown on the plan, a trail is required to be extended
from Catalina Way to the west to intersect with TH 3. Additionally, a sidewalk is
required to be extended from its existing location of Cascade Drive to the west to
intersect with the private roadway along the easterly property line of the plat. All other
park requirements have been met through cash-in-lieu payments.
Engineering Comments
The Engineering Division has submitted comments for the Developer to address. A 30-
foot wide utility easement is shown along the east property line for the location of a
sanitary sewer line. An existing easement from Cascade Drive to the west is for utilities
that currently exist in the easement. Engineering has recommended approval of the
Tamarack Ridge 4th Addition Final Plat subject to any engineering comments or
requirements.
ACTION REQUESTED
Recommend approval of the Tamarack Ridge 4th Addition Final Plat contingent upon
engineering comments and forward the recommendation to the City Council.
.
~~
Lee Smick,AICP
City Planner
cc: Jim Ostenson, Farmington Severson, L.P.
.
MAR. 30. 2005 1:32PM
DArE
APPLICAl:ION FOR PUT REV!'
. PLAT. NAME 'd !rI;1(lfd 16' II!
LOCATION rl h 'j q ~ I> & zi'1~~ -if.
ARI..<\. BOUNDED BY ~l!~
TOT.U GROS S .w:A 1J/r>>Y' I, S- tiC (" (" J
ZONING DISTRICT(S) 13 ""'I
\'
NAMES & ADDRESSES OF ALL O'W"NDtS
~dJ y~~ln/ L/t/ ?f'3JEJ
PHONE: 9~- 2 -if r /-1 flJj
NAME & ADDP.l:SS OF I.AlID S\."RVEYOR/!;NGl:<!;ER ~~ ' \l\OI\~oQ~
't ~ '^~ oQ..f'\I^.~/'-\Z2. w.~'r\';.Q "M' 'j ~~dS., ~ .Go;~ IP51- 1# If( /-/9/ L/
NAL'tLS iii ADDRESSES of All .:\DJO!NI~G P10PERTY Ow""NEl'. . VA!l.AEL::: nOM:1 LO
PLAT REVIEW OPTION:
PRELL~INARY & tIN~~ !OGE!~ER:
PRE PLAt ADMI~ISTIL~rlVE t!~:
ON:
~A/A'-
!P ~O{)
IN SEQUE~CE:
PRE FLU SU?.!T"I:
.
I HLREBY CE)i.TIFY IRAT I A..':1 (~E ARE) 'IRE FEE DWElt(S) OF THE AEon LA..'ID7 ni.l'! 'IHE
PERSON PREPARING 'IRE PL.~! HAS REC!!V!D A COpy OF TITLE 11, ca~TE~S 1 IHRU 5.
EL'JTIILED I'SUEDIVISIONS" .;\),1) tItlE 10. CHAPTtAS 1 THRU 12 E~!In.ED IIZ0NI~G" OF TR!
FARMI~GTON CITY CODE .~D ~ILt P~?_lRE TRE PLAT L~ ACCOP~~~CE ~ITS TEE PROVISIONS
CONTAI~ED IHERtIN.
ADVISORY MEETING:
1 . SKE'ICR PLAN
2. stAFf AND DEVELOPER CONSENSUS
.
.
.
.
z
o
I-
o
o
<(
J:
I-
~
w
C)
o
0:::
~
o
<(
0:::
<(
2
<C
I-
..sin
i"
j'
~~
,.
tf
i~
.,
~:
~.
i1!
"
."
~&
!!
~~
~:
~i
J!!~
~~
~.
~!
~.!
~
!l
~
"
~
~
~
z
;;
~
"
l
.
i
!
$
,
..
1
~
!
.
~
i'
/
B 5
~ i
5 ~
~ !
I !
~ -
"
o
~
i'
I
~
~
I
~
'!i
~
/=
8
"
g
~
s
!.
~
f
j
8
~o
ii
~.!!
.,
i-:
:-i
;S~
q
1.
M.
<s
3 !
.,
S!
i.2
")1
~
0'
3 ~~
g :11
-< ~ ~
I ~r
~ ~!
5 €!
~ ~l=
g i~
~ ~~
ail/BIf 4
~
~i a;
.~! :
'~! ~
0:::1
~!
~l
!I
O-.!
;s
j
"
J
~L
':,.)[
J S
51
~"
.'.
{I
"
~ ]0
~
!~
i
E
~ ~
; ~ l
. .
/= &,; 1
8 ~ ~o 8
o ~ Bl~
~ ~ t Ii
~ ~ ~ i
~
"Ii
B
i I
~ ~
"
<L i
1
~
~
f ;
t !
5 i
1 E
.
a .
11 ,;
;. 3
~
i .
j ~
- ~
~ .!
f 11
!
! ~
- !
!.
!
~
!
i
]
i
.II
50
.z
e:
oi
!~
].!
i1
gi
!~
:~
j!
~l
~ . ~
~ lu
z ~~
;;~F
:~ i 1
~g ~~
:-'C~
1-
'~\ !
",~\ ~
~,.f'\
~Yj
~~
~_u~,~::J
!
!
I
~
~
I
~
i
~
.
~t: is
ffi '-. ;
~ii ~
;;.~ ~
r~~ :3
11
I
=
.
1
"
H
}.!
H
.~
is
~ i
"'!
~"Ii
~ 3
~i
ii i
~ l!
~~
,-
~ ~
~A
~ ;
<L.!!
111-
;.2
U
:~
.2:;
~i
.1
~
.
S
&
~ I
io
!N
i
...
~
~
li ~
~.
oS
h
OJ!
~;
~~
i.
':;~
;.:-
j.
H
~:
s.2 ~
..
.,
i;
j!
i
I
i
I
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
;s
~ f
j t
f 1
. ~
i
~
i i
~:
. <~
rj{
j ]
.'l~
i
,;
E
~
l
f
8
2
i
~
;
~
.
~
i
"
~
.
~
!
~
.
~
t
j
~
.
z
o
r-
o
o
<(
I
r-
-.;:j-
.
W
G
o
0::::
~
U
<(
0::::
<(
L
<(
I-
.
r-'---~Jj)..
r --r---
i. : ---l:'!'
t ;',', 1.:'./ r
I' ,,::,:" i ~
f-h- I ,,~, :..~
I -,-,:-"'-'~~ J ;::2
:~, I --l ~i5a
I 1..' I z" . ~'i
":';f II i1~' " (Jig
: ", ~ '';'" l!! . ;-'
L___,__J \~f: e
t.OMJ.~XNmll.J.l~SJ ~
99'9LI
...,..---
/'.... N:.Jr,NOON ,/ "rl'
/ J
/ /
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,/
I
\~
'ill ',\
1
\{\
\'!>~
~ \"1
~ Xl
-" f
'C, ,
tn I\..._
....////
/
...----
---
!::XlIll3fT 4
,rl ~
I
~
~ .~
2 ~~ 'ti ~
~ 0
~ ~ "g N
-~ ~
~! 5'" ~8 w
~ ~s ~I w
~ ~iaj ~ ~~ "
<, ~ .< W1
~~ lDo~ ~ W~~
s ~ o~- ~l
~ ~8 ~1-ffi 0 aU'
:!J ~ 1i:~ ~~~ ~ 8i~ ..1
-.=>
W~ ~2Z ~i'!'
~ ~~ ~~~ I;! ~~~ -I
" 0=>2 ~~~
~~ ~g~ i P..d
I f;~~
z.~
<I 0 ~~~
I w '"
III < <
..,
I"
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
1
I
is '"
l ~ \ ~
I \,...
I :
I i'!
I 9
I ~
I 0
I ;:;
I ~
I ~
I
I
I
I
I
I
<( I
~ :
(.) ___________.1"
o M,O>,",,'" ri
I
I
I
______.J
IC"'-'U
-4-...;_'JIY\ l3-J~ I ("'
tt'osz _.J(_..L..0 H16DZ
M.91,6;'69S
,
-;....
...--
'" 1
I
I
I
I
1
~ :
, I
i :
~~ I
~ ~3 I
"It /\ I
, \ I
~
\
I
I
l'j>
I
1
I
I
I
1
I
I
1
1
I
I
I
I
1
1
1
I
I
'" I
I
'---
~
__=-, a~o.!.I-------
:: ,I, :.:i----------~....,
.~ 1 CD 1-- I"
: : /.... () ~:
~I I ' 1
~: : .J ~:
II ~"I
I 1 "/' 1-. i~ I
:: :) !?I.
:: /_ ~,l~
d: () i'
~: : I
': : " :
~, :
..g;;:_---,J lr_----.~<MC --- :-
--- .=--.~~~.-.~'~
. s~i8 ~~~ '3.~ IZS.69N
_,,~ ,,,,,n"""].'.) "" .0," ~
,-"" ~:\.;"",~ 0 _,,0'("' ,'''''''^
\ '\\ ; C,;.",<, \\" (', \; ;,....,....-' "....,;, ,0'/
~ ~ ~.... " I i\\ \.....
N
(~I
__""':952.
~
c.')
/
,,{,
'-'
<
I-
~
::>
o
-----------
(.1H]rItlNOI'I:)SKI"113l.Slf'lIYN1)V
f/~--;I'11l 'HI ~J.l?k ':!O)f'Iol
IH.S 1\oU. Jl) ~3S.:lO
\., """"'..
.' '
~!
Il:!>.Y'_~
,~
I'
r! j
~. ,
3~ I
i~!
i
,
!
i
~
! .
i
i
"
$1
!
i ~
! i
i
!
i
I
i
!
i
siiiLU,":::- I
.~""IIH1
i
sl
~i
,
t.~~",~" ~.
._-_~____e:a~~~ ~~~w~
lI'1'flOlS~
l
I
I
r"')
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
r---J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
L
~?
- ,-,
; - ~.j
;~ ~c
;~ Ld
~... _J
-i= C
:L.. 2~
.:::' J!_
:;:'" Ld
~5 Q-
IL LL
~ - ,~-_s_
Ld .
1--
<(
c'
(,')
.,
I
I
I
.
.
.
z
o
~
o
o
<(
I
~:J:
~u
I-
LU
~
(f)
<(
e:::
<(
w
c..?
o
0:::
~
o
<(
0:::
<(
:2
<(
~
---
./
./
/
/
.
~~H!!
..... II ~~
",,,,"'
~.....D
~~~
0"'"
~o'"
~~~
~~~
000
.........
eXf/!8/T A
I
I
I
-------------------~
<;t
b[
~~
::>;:;
o~
i
":"S3,A/\ l33i:!i-S Hl6Ct:
'"
....
~
u
o
...J
al
---
~ ,..... ,..... . r'\'" I
.,..,l\,..~i-\j,..\} ':)':J VI"
~~G \_ \ ~ ~ ;~ l\l~~:;C:;
3l." .1-.......
---
---
~, t- \ ~~
v'A~ ~=J~~~ C\~
\ ""\ \ <J ~"'v i~~1\~) \ \ \
.. ,..... ~
_-----------l
I
I
1
.r!
"il
0:::1
wl
~I
!I
P..d
rr}
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r---J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
L_--1
I
I
I
~;
<C:_ ~-,
L,j
~c :c
~~
->-
L'~
;(
'../ S~
:5 QJ,_
c.:::: .~
~- =;:
()
LoJ '-"
1--
<(
1--
(f)
.
.
.
/?AfflCrlg
1 0-5-12
1 0-5-13
2. Conditional:
ed and breakfast.
gs, townhouse.
Dwelli
Offices.
Public utility
3. Accessory:
Accessory structqres.
Home occupations.
Solar energy systems. (Ord. 002-469, 2-19-2002; amd. Ord.
002-483, 12-2-2002)
t 10-5-13; B-1 HIGHWAY BUSINESS DISTRICT:
# (A) Purpose: The B-1 highway business district is intended to provide
pockets of convenience type uses along major thoroughfares that
are both pedestrian accessible from adjoining neighborhoods and
automobile accessible for short trips and through traffic.
August 2003
City of Farmington
1 0-5-13
10-5-13
.
(B)
Bulk And Density Standards:
1. Minimum Standards:
Lot area
10,000 square feet
Lot width
75 feet
Front yard setback
30 feet
Side yard setback
1 0 feet
Rear yard setback
1 0 feet
Minimum side and rear yard abutting
any residential district
Off street parking and access drives
1 0 feet
Public and semipublic buildings
35 feet
Recreational, entertainment, commercial
and industrial uses
50 feet
.
Height (maximum)
35 feet
Maximum lot coverage of all structures
25 percent
All standards are minimum requirements unless noted.
(C) Uses:
1. Permitted:
Animal clinics.
Clinics.
Clubs.
Coffee shops.
Commercial recreational uses.
Convenience store, without gas.
.
August 2003
City of Farmington
1 0-5-13 1 0-5-13
. Health clubs.
Hotels.
Motels.
Offices.
Personal and professional services.
Personal health and beauty services.
Recreation equipment sales/service/repair.
Restaurants, class I, traditional.
Retail facilities.
Sexually oriented businesses - accessory.
2. Conditional:
Auction houses.
. Auto repair, minor.
Auto sales.
Car washes.
Child daycare center, commercial.
Convenience store, with gas.
Dental laboratories.
Grocery stores.
Group daycare centers, commercial.
Hospitals.
Nursing homes.
Outdoor sales.
.
August 2003
City of Farmington
10-5-13
1 0-5-14
.
Public buildings.
Public utility buildings.
Restaurants, class II, fast food, convenience.
Restaurants, class III, with liquor service.
Restaurants, class IV, nonintoxicating.
Solar energy systems.
Supply yards.
Theaters.
Wholesale businesses.
3. Accessory:
Parking lots. (Ord. 002-469, 2-19-2002)
.
1 0-5-14:
B-2 DOWNTOWN BUSINESS DISTRICT:
(A) Purpos: The 8-2 downtown business district identifies a variety of
general commercial and higher density residential uses for the
downto area in order to expand and strengthen the downtown as
the prim y commercial district for the city, create a pedestrian
friendly d wntown, and promote the city as a cultural center.
Objectives f this district are to preserve historical buildings, require
high design tandards, and provide a diverse mix of community
oriented com ercial and cultural activities that are pedestrian
oriented and ac essible to area residents.
Lot area
5,000 square feet
(8)
Lot width
50 feet
Front yard setback
o feet
.
August 2003
City of Farmington
.
::JI
1S:::..... :::';:~3",'" ';'1(':CE:"l';'~ Htl
"1j'bs09t"t?
...
!~ C;
~~ ~
~~ 5
.
, ,
Ii ~..: ~
~ ~ ~
Ili1llij.i
II 'II/I ~ II ~
II 'I II I ~ d
(' III i 1I11 if s i
, I I J II I d ~ ~
lii5~EI l!::.ie
<C ~~"'99 ~;g~
~ q~..~~~~~
~~H~n~ n ~I
.
1S3M 3nN3i\ v VlooeYiVO
L1Cl
:{
~
~
oj ci ~
~ ~ ~
~ II
i , I
II I
, I
~ i I
a ' I
~ I I
& 1,.1
n .,
d tt ~ E
~ ~ ~ g
...
(tl~; _ ____
;,
. .
; - ~
UI
. ,
t lD~1
~ N~I
- 1
- U 1
1
1
1
1
1
~
,
,
,
1
-__ ____-I
~,
.----.,
1
!I
too
~N
'Ii
t
a ·
~
\,
t \\
~s ~
:l 1
1
\'
t '" '~
,., \
EfI//I5/rc
)::J
]!
I ~
. ~
a
'..
i.
'"
--------.r.....:r --~..:r---=_ -~-.....,.....,:_,.::._~~~ -
I "
: ~""',.//'-"i ~ ],....'
I ~ i I
~~: 138 ~:
Ii: ~!
------"\1
- \
I
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
ti ~
~'4 :
;
en ,
)o-~ : j" ~
~ ~~I~
~~ Mi :11~.
o~ ,~jtl
~..... _L~ HI,
~~ -r -~ H~i
<I!? 1 'U.
~~ : jE~;
~~ Ot; ~1.i
~ : rr~j
!
t i
N~ _ _ 1
---d- ----~.)
--.r---,
co i :
:: 1
;. I
"
t
U)~ ..
!:
t
"':
ii
"
"
,,'
'"
"
'"
'"
g
.....s Z ~
':'53::,
..,..,..,..,.... .."...............
~....=.... ............,
- n}:}:~, :,""uS~;?;:~
~ i' . GJfWJ!1O.....1IO "I
5 ~ ..:
-----,,--., i ~ :
.1 1
.. L___. -------------~------_______..____1
N
~
('3^V 31V0N3ddIHO)
[ 'ON A VMfrolH llNl1lIJ. :n ViS
os.
(:l,',,,,, 3.~';'~~3ddlh::::1
i: 'C~: .'.';',.:~'if:'i )I::;:b~ 3':'';'...5
~
'"
~
6
~
~
~
o
3
~
el
~~
il1lE
::IS
ti ~ "jg
fa 2ti
~ ~ ~~
UJ
(:>
Cl
ii?
~
u
<(
0::
<(
::;
~
~
z
UJ
::;
Q.
o
-'
~
'"
Cl
1.1)
'"
::;
<(
-,
.....
<(
-'
Q.
r
0::
<(
Z
~
~
UJ
?tf
i
H
~ S
I:i
!;;
~
2
J :
t
li
'f
l-
.J
;J
II
Il
r"
.)1
ji;
'I
U.
p;
iti
_ I
11'1
~ !
;'
!. I
!
,.iii>.
~ifi-tr.
....
9.'0.9
3.Z~ ,90.00S
"
;
'0: 153M
:'V__L__~~lI~\___
3nN3AV : VIVINVO J..LI,IOI.IO$ ,.t't;of,~::~ ~~
-------~,~~~\~;.~:i:~~~-----~----- ~~---j--
.
~
~
u.. 5~
5~~~
F~~~
::> 'w"
o ~~~
SJ.))HS 10 :40 t lJ)HS 33$
_----V 3NIl H'LV~------
,
II
II
I 1
/ 1
/ I
/ I
/ I
/ I
~/ 1
-- I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~
~
/
/
/
/
I "\.e..
'.
;
...
,:>j....tJ
~'....,
_,(''f
LLH;;'
~g~
O.:tlO~
J=! ~E~
=> ~~5
O~~~
tt
N02"36'09.W
0;;;'
..... g;
o ollO:
~ ~~~
::> h"
o i~~
~
~
&D"6rt
)..LI,ia.\D$
r- __~'''I- -,.,t;\
I ~:
::;i I ~
1= t ~
I 1=
r rlOl
L -',--- ---- -~N-?:'
M....,ClO.OON
'"
-..,
I
"'1
~I
~I
w
<..')
0
-
0:::
~ <l:
. t- O
0 W e(
<{ (/)
Z w
0:: l-
e(
I-
<( t1l
~ >-
I-
<( z
\ ::>
I- 0
Q-----
~
~ " l
ON
....r
~~
-CO
'"
CI)
~
'-. ,""""...
J.Jnun " l:)VNI't'U(! I
IX) J;
I'< I;
1
---- I I--
t1l
.., ~
<-- I" I--
<\~ ~ I lLJ
I ~ I W
..... I ~
It) I t1l
0> I.
nl CO I~ i!=
I
I" 0>
I 0
~I '"
__U
~zr
1
1
I
1
1
1
.1
~I
~I
1
I
I
1
I
I
1
1
------------------------------------~
!! ~!!
n-
I ~
/
~
~
.
~z
.~
i~
<(
I--
o
J=!
::>
o
znlZZ
M.6l.1Ia.OOH
("3AV 3lVON3ddIH:::>) r 'ON AVMH~IH >lNn~ 3lV15
99'6ZB
A\.Z~ ,BO.OON
>'
~
<
~~ ~ ~
o "' ~ ffil!.'
; Q~ ~ 5- 0 ~z
cii III .~~ ~::; ~ ~Q~~~
::> 1 ~~~5 5~ <
~iE I ~" " >-~~~2~
1 ~~~~ -z ~
~~ .,-, GbI ~~~~~~ .
I OZZ-' l!:i5 "' .1Il VI l'a
<:~s ~ <gw~~:~
::>0 I -" ~
~~~~ -:; "
:I: 1 " ~g:::~D.!if5
01/) x~ <
_1 1 .Lo.I<;;~ %"'
. ~~ ~ ~5~5~ "0 i:; ~~:~*~~
.., z~
w< 1 1 f'V1 ....1.0.1 ~~ ~ ~o;:itex~
'" ;~~~j; ~~;z~~5~
<f!! 1 -~
I 85J~~ ~o ~ ~~~~g~g
;;;;z 1 ",z ~
<w ~~~~~ 0< 0
D:;:E .'4 z" 15 ~I~~~:~
Ow I ~;:'~~~ :s~ 0
I/) I es~;*~e
< !;ge~~
w I ;~~i~~~
I 0
..
'"'
< 0
()
'"
()
s:
~
'"
to
..
...
i5
~~
g
"'
ill
'"
i:;
~
if:
8
~
5
,.:
....
e
00"
I"
..,
..,
'"
,.
...
'"
CI)
!
I
01
~~
!i ...
" ~
ii1
~~I
"';:;-
...."i)
~:i.!.
i
~
~
i.i
:j~
Ji:
~1!
Ii
~ I
I,
l!
!!
..
I~
.
.. ..
.. ..
.. c..
.. ...
......
.
.
.
.~
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463.7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO:
Planning Commission
~f?V
FROM:
Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
SUBJECT:
Bristol Square 5th Addition Preliminary & Final Plat
DATE:
May 10, 2005
INTRODUCTION
Jim Allen, SAS Development, LLC proposes to plat 53 multi-family townhome units in the Bristol
Square 5th Addition (Exhibit A). The Bristol Square Preliminary Plat was approved in 1998;
however, the developer is proposing revised unit counts in the proposed buildings and he has also
proposed an additional unit from the 52 that were proposed in the preliminary plat. The developer is
therefore required to submit a revised preliminary plat along with the final plat.
DISCUSSION
The Bristol Square 5th Addition located to the north ofCR 72 (213th Street) and east of Willow Trail
in the Bristol Square development. This is the final phase of the Bristol Square Townhome
development. The developer proposes 53 multi-family units on 4.46 acres yielding a gross density of
11.8 units per acre.
The proposed plat shows lot widths for individual units between 26 and 35 feet. In the 1998, the lot
widths were proposed at 30 feet. Because of the revisions to lot widths on the proposed plat, the
number of units within a building changed in most cases. Exhibit B shows the approved 1998 plat.
The pink portion of Exhibit B shows the proposed 5th Addition submitted in 2005. Next to each
building is a number calling out the total units proposed in the 2005 5th Addition plat. The 2005 plat
proposes an additional unit totaling to 53 from the approved 1998 plat totaling 52.
Transportation
The access for the 5th Addition will be to the east from Prairie View Trail to CR 72 or to the south
from Arbor Lane and Willow Trail to 213th Street. Prairie View Trail, Arbor Lane, and a portion of
Willow Trail will be constructed in the 5th Addition to complete the roadway system in the Bristol
Square development. All roadways are private and will be constructed at 24 feet in width.
Parks & Trails
Randy Distad, Parks & Recreation Director has submitted a letter concerning the trails that the
developer is required to install (Exhibit C). Trails are shown on the attached plan through the green
.
.
.
space in Block 2 and on the northerly property line in the 5th Addition. On April 27, 2005, the Parks
& Recreation Commission approved the green space in Block 2 and the proposed trails as shown.
Building Elevations
SAS Development, LLC has sold all of their lots in the 4th and 5th Additions to another builder. The
townhome building elevations are attached for review (Exhibits D & E). Two styles of townhomes
are shown. Staff has included the elevations for Planning Commission review and comment.
Engineering
Engineering has recommended approval of the Bristol Square 5th Addition Preliminary and Final Plat
subject to any engineering requirements.
ACTION REQUESTED
Recommend approval of the Bristol Square 5th Addition Preliminary and Final Plat subject to any
engineering comments or requirements and forward the recommendation to the City Council.
Respectfully submitted,
Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
cc: Jim Allen, SAS Development Inc.
.
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
er
TO:
Planning Commission IV? c.....
FROM:
Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
SUBJECT:
Roundbank Site Plan
Variance to the 50-foot front yard setback along a minor collector
DATE:
May 10, 2005
INTRODUCTION
Representatives of Roundbank are proposing to construct a 6,800 square foot building on 1.44
acres at the southeast intersection of CSAH 66 and TH 3 (Exhibit A). The bank is part of the
Tamarack Ridge 4th Addition Final Plat.
.
DISCUSSION
The subject property is zoned B-1 (Highway Business) and is designated 'Business' in the
Comprehensive Plan. The bank use is a permitted use under Personal and Professional Services
in the B-1 zoning district. The Planning Commission has had the opportunity to review concept
plans for the bank on two separate occasions including December 12, 2004 (Exhibit B) and
February 8, 2005 (Exhibit C).
Site Plan Review
According to the City Code, site plan review and approval by the Planning Commission is
required for all commercial development. The Commission reviews general site design,
including setbacks, access, parking, landscaping, and other potential impacts to surrounding
properties. The applicant has chosen to have the site plan reviewed concurrently with the
Tamarack Ridge 4tli Addition Final in order to meet construction deadlines.
The applicants propose to construct a 6,800 square-foot first floor and basement for the building.
Future plans include an 1,800 square foot expansion of the building. The plan also calls for 4
drive-thru lanes on the northeast side of the building. The lot coverage for the building is 10.8%
meeting the lot coverage of a maximum of 35%. The setbacks for the building meet City
requirements with the exception of the proposed building setback along CSAH 66, which will
. require a variance. The variance request is discussed below.
Parking requirements include I parking space per 250 s.f. of office space and 1 parking space per
2000 s.f. for warehouse space. The total number of parking spaces required is 31. The total
.
.
.
number of parking spaces proposed by the applicant is 50 with 2 handicap spaces, exceeding the
minimum parking requirements.
Elevations and Floor Plan
There has been a significant revision to the building elevations from the elevations reviewed by
the Planning Commission in December and February. As shown in the original concept (Exhibit
D), the building had a flat roof with horizontal planes prominent in the design. The revised
concept shows a peaked roof (Exhibit E), typical of the single-family homes in the area. The
building will be constructed with a stone finish in beige and brown earth tones. A circular wall
will be located in the northwest comer of the building. The floor plan shows eight office spaces
(Exhibit F). The main entrance faces west and a secondary entrance faces southeast.
Transportation
As shown on the site plan, the main access would be from Cascade Drive, which currently
terminates at the east edge of the subject property. Access from the south will be from a private
roadway proposed at 28 feet in width. The private drive will intersect with 209th and will be
constructed by the developer for the Tamarack Ridge Retail Center.
Solid Waste
Benno Klotz, the Solid Waste Supervisor, has reviewed the location of the trash enclosure and
does not recommend its location due to the need to back up the garbage truck. The applicant's
engineer has been informed of the need to relocate the trash enclosure and this issue will be dealt
with at the Planning Commission meeting on May 10, 2005.
Engineering
The Engineering Division has reviewed the grading and utilities proposed for the site and have
recommended approval of the site plan subject to any engineering comments or requirements.
Variance Discussion
The building in question will be constructed at the comer of TH 3 and CR 66. Both
transportation routes are considered minor arterial roadways and therefore require a 50-foot front
yard setback as per section 10-4-1 (L) of the City Code. Additionally, the proposed lot abuts two
roadways and therefore the front yard setback requirement is in effect along both TH 3 and CR
66 as per Section 10-4-1 (A) of the City Code. The applicants have requested a variance of 20
feet from the required 50-foot setback in order to achieve the circulation and parking required for
the site.
The Planning Commission reviewed the variance request on February 8, 2005 during the review
of the concept plan and most of the Commissioners did not see a problem with the variance
request (Exhibit C).
The Dakota County Plat Commission reviewed this variance request on February 22, 2005 and
on May 2, 2005 and determined that the approval of the variance by the City would not interfere
with the right-of-way requirements on CSAH 66 (Exhibit G).
.
.
.
The Planning Commission must determine whether the reasons provided by the applicant
warrant approval of the variance. The City Code provides the following criteria that must be met
for a variance to be approved:
1. Because of 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.
Because of the need to provide adequate parking in front of the building the bank
needs to be located as far north as possible on the site plan to achieve this goal.
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 property is located on two minor arterial roadways requiring a 50-[00t setback
for buildings. The typical front setback in the B-1 district is 30 feet and the side yard
setback is 10 feet.
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 alleged hardship 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 Dakota County Plat Commission reviewed the variance request concerning the
location of the proposed building versus the right-of-way for CSAH 66 and
determined that the approval of the variance by the City would not interfere with the
right-of-way requirements on CSAH 66. The variance would not cause any of the
other adverse effects mentioned above.
5. The proposed variance will not substantially increase the congestion of the public
streets, or increase the danger of fire, or be detrimental to the public welfare or public
safety.
The variance would not create any of the above-mentioned adverse effects.
6. The requested variance is the minimum action required to eliminate the hardship.
The setback of 30 feet is the minimum action required to allow adequate parking in
front of the building.
.
.
.
City staff recommends the approval of the variance.
ACTION REQUESTED
1. Approve the Variance request of 20 feet from the required 50-foot setback in order to
achieve the circulation and parking required for the site.
2. Approve the Roundbank Site Plan contingent upon engineering requirements.
Respectfully submitted,
~~
Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
cc: Roundbank
.
CITY OF FARMINGTON
VARIANCE APPLICATION
Farmington, MN 55024
651-463-7111 FAX 651-463-1611
Applicant Name R()\JNDBANK
Applicant Address 200 .;lNO f>T. NE
Street
Phone Number 5"7-B.=?S- '1:120
Legal Description of Subject Property: (lot, block, plat name, section, township, range)
LoT I , BLO<..K. I . TAMA.RA.c.K R, I)~e: '1m Apl>/nl)N I S(;a7ollJ.1" rwp. ".., I RAlIIl.E I'
WI6ECA
City
MtJ
State
5'-D<J3
Zip Code
Current Land Use UWOEufUlPEn OuTLoT' Current Zoning District 5 - I
.
Specific Nature of Request / Claimed Hardship: ReDuc..E REOo,tU:P BOILO.tJ<:> S1!5.TBAc.K AL.n^lf..
CSA\-I ~~ FROM 50 ~r 10 '30 r:EET / BUILDABLE: Att.r;:A Re~Ic.TED '~CA\')SF bt=' So'SJ:.TBACIC.
ALblJra 11.40 H/6HINAV'!.. (T.H.3 ~ CSAHf.L.) WHU,fo:I WouLD ~EDUIlZ.E ADDITIONAL LAND Th
BE ()t)~"ASfD ~ .1'AR.t:.1...t6 AIl.EA. DlZf'tJ'DrT,DllU 01=' &'Lp/lIIl. ~ #JoT .RmuoT S/&.IIT' L/.I"~~
Following Attached: (please check) _ Proof of Ownership _ BoundarylLot Survey
~ Application fee ($200) _ Copies of Site Plan
_ Abstract/Resident List (adjoining property owners only)
_ Torrens (Owner's Dublicate Certificate of Title Required)
Property Owner's Signatur~~~~ J fr-c...'9 .
Date <f.-I OS - OS-
.
.U 1-~ If I
i I. h ~ j I \~.:.;'ljl r SII
~ .. ~8 I ]1 !:~ \B i I~
d"U1! I ~
cl"~]1 :,= co !~I
lit ;@J!i :~I~
l~ ~ ~. ~ .
hi ~'ii.
~ a:;~
~ ili:
w
~ _Ii.
~ f3t/fll f?lr
I t; ~ S
~
...II i @.
u ~ .... A
~ ... .
t ~ i S N
0 Co)
~ ~ z ~ oU
lrl :l
~ !!.I
~ ~ ~ !!::; ~
" ~ (@
~ a
:~~
~~
s I I ~
'" I i. ~ - s
I~ ~.;~ ~ ~ ~ i ': i i i ;
"'! ::;R -i ~ i Ii i 1I Ii! Ii I ~~ III
~~ !. i ;. ~ ! !i ~ i ~ ~ ~~ ~i J
!l1 . i ~~::; ~ . . I - -i ~ h i
~ ;~ ~I 2: ~ ;I~!!, ~I !I j ~I n I
~I n I~ ~ ~ d ii ~ I ~lli ! i U ii :
2;~
en
en
;1
n~
s!lllllll
ill III II i \ "\ I
I ~ I,I! ql i
n~~lrl i~nl
I I I I , I : I;
iJ I I I I I ' :J
^ I I I I I :::s b
~~ n~7~" ~
I I I I I I I
I I "I I !
'-,
~--~---------------
.~~~:~~~~~~~~~~~:~~~~~~
Ui~I
\ D
1
\ ~
1 ,.....
..-
\ - ri5~ ~
1 r! .
\
u-< --
I
~l
"""""""""..
._.JIMflNl'QIYJ 'WaI.tl1lNd
-""""""""""""""
i~i;; i
\
i
1
I
I
1
I ilg! ~
1 i Ii -
~f\f-~=---=ti------
I ""-~.~ - -
========~======== -=<J 1 !f !i
.1
__L______
~I
\.)1
F A;I{ fI J.f Y.f s --------
IU~~ ~
5i-- -~
U~~u~
~~-~-
.lSJ/H
s==:: >- =e:.:-
r~1
lIlt
~~;~
,~g~
~'2~
~ i;'~
I;; ;i!i~
'" _ul
.lJ.J.!I.lS
>:DG~ >_-
~p i
- -I; I ~Xf(If}I-r
R . r:
.m ~ 5zll!:
... ~ s~i
g ~~~ y N A
1;:21 :: lill!E~ .
liilii"l!I ; N
~r3 i~~ Co:)
.pi ~8Z
a ii'& w ~
"
fI.1 50,? i=
j -~ If
i iU~ , I
, .1.." ]1
! S! I" j ! .
A '1 ~, It
II:
u
hi
~::-I-----I
_<_____<_,-::...; :.C
__________ I
~ ---------------;;,
N :
1
1
I
I
t
*1
I
*
I
I
I
I
*!
I
1
*1
j . · . ... ........ .\ooo-o-oo--i'---ik
. , \; .:~:
'" .
"
:~ I
f>.
, , '
II
. , . : {. ,
'..:" ,
. ;'
, '
,
"J':' .... ........."
,
~
. .1
" ,~
--~-----t.-
1 J
I I
--+,:""'ih
I ... '~,'
l \ '?,\ ')
\ '"
\ I"
I ~\ I
I III!
: :1::
: !Jt l
: ~: 1
I ," J a
I ::: I
: ::: 1
I :::1
I ,,, I
f3t:: 1
I ",I
"I
I ,,' I
rJ ~: i
_________________J ~; I
" ,~
~
, ,~
--------------------- ,
. In. il
~,-,.Jl
I~
I
z Exll161r
~ ~
! d ~ ,.. A
~ ' %
h~ ~ .
~
. ~ (,)
3 d~ i ~
" i! Iii e ~ . i
~ ~ 8U ~ ~ w i
~
I
o
p:;
~
dI
Y
if
~
:z
i
~
~~ '. I
~ -s .....
~
!! ! 11111 L~ ,
IIIII III I
n - Id ~
n i ~~ i r I
1 I I I 1
II I I I
Bd! ~ ~ 1
::' : ::
I I I I I
~
un
pqi
I~
~
z~
:J
..
,
~ :;
~ ~ Ii
----~-~------
, ,rt-:-~/
''''f; i::--Ir
\ I .AI:
~~~-t ;' 1 ~\I'
: ....J [
"--" Ii ';'1: i~I' 51 Ii
-'~ id;
-=1=$1 I,; i"" 1",."1
.,. ~ : i 1~111l!
I " ! '; L~I>
I i// : r;: -
__ _./~/./L, _, I : T
J.. - --~
\
\
\
\\ \
\\\
\\
\\
.'
,\
\\\
\\
\\
\\
\-------
\
\
"~"""""-
~\
~I
~I
!\
, ,
=
f' A At It .3.1 i'.1 S ---------
.(~1:".
i:li;!il
H1lllt!
mil
Hm!
Wiil
1iWi
m:-;l
'''~::~~;
< '
\ I ~,I
'.' /"
, <"
_I :......_ .......
I ~ 1'........ ...c,o....
J!; "....
: ~ :
;;1
: i j
\ ! :: I
\! ::: I
~:. Ii !
\ I} :
i " "
, i:
{ 1
. '
I; !
;i /
Ii I
I ~
i
I
I f I
I ~~
L, ,,,
,..,'~~~~:~~~~~~~~ '
II~ ~p
idf :iU
: .!I
mi Im,
i.j: i'i
~ i"'~ i""
;Ii= ur~
~ nl . ; ~~
. _n.
I
~
,\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
:'
~
..Jl
g
if
m
z
s ~
~
;.1
os :~
d~
" ~ ~ ~
~ gh
~j~
cc!i'"-<Ol
IlIlIIYIM::!Ii
~~lii~
,. II: lii:''''
il!!~tiE
e~~m
m::lZ~
~ o::lj(:J
1= 1i:Ll!l....
eXI-II!3lr
)r
~
~ ~
~
~ ~
~ ~
'P-
~
U
j ~
fn~ ~ H ~
l!n b
Iii! n i
__ II,
1 n _3n ;.:i i
: H H~ iHn . 'I
!j~~ u~ h~~, i! i l H .!
Jill ui 5~1~' j1! IUi
r.o= U;. IfzH II! -
j' ~ i! J~jn
1~'J! ~~i ~~fi~ J!
!ltl ill Ii!t' i!!
!I'II' u~ ~~.]f ;il d H.l
I Uj ahH " ~ ~ G Q I
j,=E m !uu ~i j ~ ~ ~ J
..
i
I
.i
i
~
..
~
...
..
i~
~il ~~
t.g i;
~il q
~! I' i
it lH h
~i · g-
Ii i - i H
~~ ! Hi'
~a '''J P
_. "l is
i"' · .' .
,1.1 . II ;1
!l II! ~I
Ih ~hi ~i
I;] In; jj
~
{
I
u..... ./.._n__ ."_:-~_n__n_~~~~_~___n_~
nnn____nn_n__u ~~~_lU_n-~_~_~___~ _,-- ~n~_~
T- of,l( H----yyj.J S ------------
!
f
s
.
if
"
H
i"i!
'1
~I
h
IIi
~i
..
fi
J
J
1
'.
!
IIi
1,5 ! " ~
~ j ~ a f
III I ~! d ; i
.- Sj I .
Iii h ! H
:if !i ! H
r Ir ~l; ~Ii ~i
I! ! IiH :h l Ii
~~
2~.!!
'l "
~
o
liS ~p I i~i
i!l! ~ -I; ~ ~ I
~ I>>~ " lill
: !~i .dI
~ ~~i ~
~~Ii < I,ll, I i., ~
~:ii~ ~r
:g ~.ii . @ m
i';~ .b ia.-Cb ,~ ~ 0
~hl - ..~ ~. " P:: :;g ~
~ ~~~l r w
-iti 2!i ""Wi;, n ~ ~ ~
. ~
I I i . i - I-
. .... ... ';",
~ . -. . ~
i~ i~ i~ I~ i~ I~ i~
~~ ~~ g; ; g~ ~ g~
II I! II :1 II :1 II
lid d d ., d ., d
!I it II If iI l ;l
I! II U h U I Ii
1
i I ...... '" '" "' " "
"'" -
Jj ... III III (ll (ll (ll III
i 51 -
~
, i
~! ;':
il .,
W( ~i
Ii
il
h
!l!l
Ii
~I
~1
~ J !
~ ~Jj ~ i
d l; ~
q~~ ~.
hU ~!
~~~
:h
il!~
Ii';!!
..~~
(@
d
!I
wO
Qn:;::
~~
@;!i!:
~:id
y@.
~tol>
e Soil
iii
~
~ ~
; .
<IJ II I
~ ;I!! i
~ ~: fH
lw ~ ~
Iol :i II
S I! ~ ~
z Ii- II
~ !!n
~~ Ii
z
~ j Ii .1
u 'i Jf. I!~
~ !n aJi Iii
:: !ii Iii! i~1
B l!, n., OJ.
~ H ult i.a
-:5; I dl nll' f."t . J'
~ ill d~ .I ~ J .. II
~ < . " j J I.
~::::::q...:: ! I U !j , I i 1
f ~ ! i j~ i; ill ld I f h !5 I tft if ii
I ."j tl ... 1111 I "I 's' hi I I' I
: f1H! ~i! I" ! I;: ;Ji f' 'I J
, - 11. r1,\I II' I -! 't 1 IJ~ .1 h f
! II. ~J{ ~'{ ~ ! i i!. 1. i! i~1 it ~!
J 1)1 II; I, fil I ! n it f' .tI ~I h
11 il = =J ~~i ~~{ ~!I ~f ~ !J ~i i! iii It i~t
co I d oJ d %
.
IIUi~i!:~ :;
.ba.~B.~. il'~
ij!" .~>:: e.
h:I..~I~I'" ~~
"~"'.!l~a s
i :=~;~I
~ Snl~
...
e
=
CD
Z
;:
C
U
...
=
z
:5
:I
~
~
,..
...
E)</I181T
;l
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes
December 14,2004
Page 9
4.
r;:y /1/ errS
Discussion
a) Round Bank Concept Plan (Tamarack Ridge)
The Round Bank is proposing to construct a bank facility on the southeast comer
ofHwy 66 and TH3. The remaining portion of the outlot would be additional
building sites. The main access would be along Cascade Drive off ofHwy 66.
The plan shows a right-in only from TH3.
Mr. Michael Campmeyer, representing Round Bank, stated it will be a 6,000 sq.
ft. building made of concrete and brick. They tried to get a right-in and right-out
on Hwy 66, but the County would not allow it. It will be a single-story building
with a basement. There will be an area for future expansion and four drive-up
lanes. There will be 40 parking spaces including handicap parking. They hope to
start construction in the spring.
Commission Johnson liked the plan. Commission Larson stated his only concern
was traffic and that is being addressed. The Commission looked forward to
receiving the preliminary and final plat.
5. Adjourn
MOTION by Larson, second by Barker to adjourn. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
Respectfully submitted,
Approved -1tfMtllf.t/t/ II, za:;6
V I I
~?v7~
~ynthia Muller
Executive Assistant
{;(1I18rTC
Planning Commission Minutes
February 8, 2005
Page 3
.
.
4 b)
.
sign stating future through street on the south side of the cul-de-sac. Staff felt it
would be appropriate to let people know this could occur. Commissioner Johnson
agreed this would eliminate future problems with people not being notified.
Commissioner Barker discussed having the road to the west eventually going
south to a T intersection into the cul-de-sac. How does that work if a developer
acquires the property to the south? How much control does the City have with
regard to where the road can connect? Community Development Director Carroll
replied right now the major control is the property to the south lies in the
township. The annexation would be contingent on them accepting whatever
roadway configuration the City desires. If someone buys it for commercial or
industrial purpose like mini-storage that would be a significant disadvantage to bi-
sect the lot with a road like that. If a higher density residential use was
developed, that could be a benefit as a way to get to Willow Street or go to the
north. It is important to discuss this extension so when the Planning Division
looks at concept plans when they come in for the area to the south this can be
discussed as an option. Commissioner Barker felt any future problems could be
alleviated by choosing concept one now. The road access is already there. When
it is extended south, there is no one living on that road iflot 19 is removed.
People that live in the cul-de-sac will continue to live in the cul-de-sac. Traffic
would go down the east road.
Chair Rotty stated either plan could work. He was comfortable with concept two
because of the buffers. Concept one does it a little but not as nice. He could live
with concept one, but was concerned lot 11 may not be a buildable lot. The
Commission has agreed with the R-2 zoning and the developer has made great
attempts in buffering the lots to the north and the east.
Staff will meet with the developer and their engineer to determine if they are
buildable lots, lot widths, and the number of housing pads that will fit. The
Commission would see the preliminary plat next. The biggest issue is the access
to the property to the south.
Roundbank Concept Plan - Variance to Side Yard Setback Question
Applicant: Roundbank
They have eliminated the access along TH3 and they are looking at the possibility
of a variance. TH3 runs north and south along the west side of the proposed
building. CSAH66 runs along the north side. MNDot did not approve the right-
in, right-out access on TH3 so they are now looking at an interior circulation
pattern which brings them around to Cascade Drive. The area is zoned B-1 and is
allowed for a banlc A site plan review will be done approximately the same time
as the preliminary plat. One concern of the bank is a variance. The City requires
a 50 ft. setback for buildings along minor arterial roadways. TH3 and CSAH66
are minor arterial roadways. They meet this requirement along TH3, however
they do not meet it along CSAH66 where it is 30 ft. from the property line rather
than 50 ft. The bank wanted to know if the Planning Commission would be
willing to look at a variance at a future meeting. Cascade Drive is a public
Planning Commission Minutes
February 8, 2005
Page 4
a/l/grr~
.
roadway and the bank would like to have an access to 209th Street. The code
requires a circulation pattern be determined before a preliminary plat can be
submitted.
Chair Rotty reiterated that the circulation pattern will need to be determined
before the preliminary plat. He felt the plat is a very nice addition to that area.
As far as the variance, he does not see it as a sight issue. He would support the
setback variance for 30 ft.
Commissioner Richter would not have a problem with the variance and agreed it
is a good location.
Commissioner Barker also liked the location and had no concerns with the
variance. He asked if it would meet the criteria and staff assured him it would.
Commissioner Johnson also liked the location. He asked about the hardship if it
is an empty lot. He would rather give a variance on parking spaces. Staff has not
been able to meet with the bank to determine the hardship.
.
The preliminary plat will need to be submitted by February 14, 2005 to meet the
five week review time period. Community Development Director Carroll stated
there is an issue related to the variance that came up today. There is a pending
powerline route from an existing substation in Empire running west through this
general area to a new substation behind the Northern Natural Gas facility. The
EQB is involved in a routing decision. Residents in Empire Township are arguing
the powerline should come down CSAH66. One issue raised was the issue of
expanding CSAH66 in the future. If the County is considering expanding the
road, they would have to expand to the south, as the river is close to the road on
the north side. He suggested the bank call the County Engineer to see what plans
they have for the expansion of CSAH66. There are some problems with
expanding the road as what is now a T intersection will be a through intersection.
The City's transportation plan envisions CSAH66 at the intersection ofTH3
would be expanded to the west (the 20gth Street extension). It would eventually
hook up with a road that dead ends by the Middle School. That will continue
further to the west. 20gth Street now goes to Akin Road and dead ends again.
There is a stretch that will be built behind Northern Natural Gas that will hook up
with 20gth Street in the industrial park. The Dakota County East-West Corridor
Study identified this as one of four major east-west corridors. Eventually there
will be a road from Hwy 52 to CSAH66, down 20gth Street and to Cedar Avenue
in Lakeville. The possibility of the road being expanded plays into the issue of
granting the variance. He suggested the bank obtain a letter from the County
stating they would not have a problem with it. The plat would also go to the
County Plat Commission because it is next to a County roadway.
.
rr D
.H -~ If III I Iii I ill I I I&@
U II b I j i!11 I E:
:a J aJ I] =I!I ' ..1 -z ,...
.Jl is
i' '1 n. III ~ '~I u .....
;lli 11!IJ It I If ~~ .
N
. ,~.H l:iI: l~iI ;IL; m 2~ c:t:
~ iO!~ iO.. 0
; ht 1"1 I'<: :z I i ~
~ ~h, I ~.i: ..Ii i IlIJ, i
~ : !~: ~
1 ~ " :l
Ji fI ;:;It J
.. '" -" J
, j\" r! ::Z;:..t .~
"7.~:' ~ ~l ~
,. ~'r7-::t
~ Ili t* ~
ii: '>-: \:II-; '.
I;; ~ "", ..
;,. ...., ~~ ~
_l?! m...l~ 1
r ';' 'Ii' II
I L I
l ":
........ '
............
.
........
".........
.
I ~- '- TI-', ./~. ,./
... ~;/ "
~ All ( ,--
~ ~ J I
~ ~I' I,
~ ~ ~ I
\i\ & ~ '
:r ;;\ ii
JjI: "t~,uu ~' F~"
".., I, ..' ~~. :\~; ,:;' '~:.-.<:',-:,,~_.':~:} ~:~;:~~'.::,~:-:~~>~T ' ".
'-_'f~ .:;.: .':;'''~''~':: ':.-. ",' '. -, ," ..' . ,".
- --'-'__'-~-""""'-'-'-'--'--'-'-'-'- .-. -. -, ~--_.-
8
, '
) 1
'1
;\J :
Z
in ()
, !k ~
: j r
i)l
II' 4:
! !ill
U >
:J 41
" ~
!I
i: iLl
r-
i
~ , i
I
,~ ~
I'
i\1l
J ;
iJf. u.i.
~ H ,~.
-;; i ,0
e \9
~ ~ . I, !
~ 'u
:'l
.. .llil
'i
'\ ;1 I
~ , 'I
I
~ i I
Ii I
'" ! I
L 'I
... i
"' .! I
~ I
\1\ !
~
~ I
1
~u
I 'I
~ J -II
~tt iU~ I Uj III I ill I r;:Xf!l8lr
:a . ..J lili 1 i!11 ~
~:d 'lU, !j{ ~ E; ~
. 1.1 d I @oo E
II! f.f " will ~ ..!~ ,...
I Ii I"! ~ !~ dill::)
~ 1I1!ln;: ,...
hJ ':1: ~ ";! t!;!}<!t .
~ .";;! ;Ils !!!!:;>> N
0 ~1YYl
~ Ilii p::: ~ I : II::)d c:c
@.IY
" _II ..IK ~ II::)
l!l1: !
@.
. z
0 z
;:: 0
~ ~ z
w ~ 0
.... ~
W
I- W
~ t;
w w
:I: ~ t;
5 5~
0 ~~
<n ~~
li:';
C\l g~
'<t
.
.H U1 If pjR/Dir
'iJ $1 I III I !Ii I i~1 I
I _filii I] i!11
.1.'111, II : hi . rll ~ ~ I s r
IU flf ~ -,, d
1'!l1 lIt ~ g N ,..
::i! ~ ".!. " I!i).. N
~' hi 'wi ~ ~ !!l: .
~ I~.! I~~B 0 i Q ,..
~~Btft;;:~~~%:i:;:if\~t!~1~. ,IiI Q
Ii ,I.. ~ ;;;;: I !i i I ~ !i I d cr:
~ _III I .11 ~ I ;il OJ!.
_1It~
~I ~ i
.
rl!lo :r~liI)
II
II
I,.-~I.m-~
II
II
{ :::~
1\ II
II II
t~Z'.ltVlOO
JI tl
1I.11
L. li!i :'1!': II)
II II II
II It II
::-rr If:r~
II It II
II II
z
:S
0-
a:
o
o
it!?
z-
~~
.
.
Surveyor's Office
Dakota County
Western Service Center
14955 Galaxie Avenue
Apple Valley, MN 55124
952,891,7087
Fax 952,891,7097
www.co.dakota.mn.us
.
.
o
Printed on recycled paper
with 30% pot;t-con~IJn-,~I- 'Na'01.e
I.tl EQlJp..L ()PPOP1U!~in EI1P~OYER
~~
eX!l1 b /T CT-/
February 24,2005
City of Fannington
Attention Lee Smick
325 Oak Street
Farmington MN 55024
Re:
ROUNDBANK
The Dakota County Plat Commission met on February 22, 2005, to consider the concept
plan of ROUNDBANK. Said plat is adjacent to CSAH 66, and is therefore subject to the
Dakota County Contiguous Plat Ordinance.
This plat was reviewed as a concept plan. The plat should show restricted access on all
of CSAH 66. Access to the property will be made from the municipal roadway. The
current Right of Way Guidelines for a two-lane road is 55 feet of half right of way for
CSAH 66. The Plat Commission would like to know what future plans are for 20Sth
Street.
The Ordinance requires submittal of preliminary and final plats before a recommendation
is made to the County Board.
No work shall commence in the County right of way until a permit is obtained from the
County Transportation Department and no permit will be issued until the plat has been
filed with the County Recorder's Office. The Plat Commission does not review or
approve the actual engineering design of proposed accesses or other improvements to be
made in the right of way. The Plat Commission highly recommends early contact with
the Transportation Department to discuss design features of any construction in public
right of way. The County Transportation Department permit process reviews the design
and may require construction of highway improvements, including, but not limited to,
turn lanes, drainage features, limitations on intersecting street widths, allowance and size
of medians, etc.
Sincerely,
--=r=-~ ---=---::-
7"t/1./44
Todd B. Tollefson
Secretary, Plat Commission
c:
Thomas Monson, American Savings
.
Surveyor's Office
Dakota County
Western Service Center
14955 Galaxie Avenue
Apple Valley, MN 55124
952891,7087
Fax 952,891,7097
www.co.dakota.mn.us
.
.
o
Pnnted on recyc.lec\ paper
with 30% post-consumer 'Naste
AN rQU;'L OPf'OPTUNllY EMPloyER
erx II /8//'6-- 7.--
May 5, 2005
City of Farmington
Attention Lee Smick
325 Oak Street
Farmington MN 55024
Re: TAMARAC RIDGE 4TH ADDITION
The Dakota County Plat Commission met on May 2,2005, to consider the preliminary and
final plat ofTAMARAC RIDGE 4TH ADDITION. Said plat is adjacent to CSAH 66, and
is therefore subject to the Dakota County Contiguous Plat Ordinance.
Currently, restricted access is shown along all of CSAH 66 and no further right-of-way is
needed.
The Plat Commission has approved the preliminary and final plat and will recommend
approval to the Board of Commissioners when the plat is submitted in signed Mylar form.
No work shall commence in the County right of way until a permit is obtained from the
County Transportation Department and no permit will be issued until the plat has been
filed with the County Recorder's Office. The Plat Commission does not review or approve
the actual engineering design of proposed accesses or other improvements to be made in
the right of way. The Plat Commission highly recommends early contact with the
Transportation Department to discuss design features of any construction in public right of
way. The County Transportation Department permit process reviews the design and may
require construction of highway improvements, including, but not limited to, turn lanes,
drainage features, limitations on intersecting street widths, allowance and size of medians,
etc.
Sincerely,
~"
Z~~e7!F
Secretary, Plat Commission
~ II n , IfJ II;
. l' ~il '. ]~ · 2
" ~~ Ii I ~ · I~~~
1I n n I II 2~~1 ~ ~
lit ;!i~~ gf? ~
hI 1 m; : ~
"\ , :i~i~~i~ill~ill[ru~ill!~i@!~iSi$;lli~uJj;i'i!~: ! Z I \ \
\\ III *,_ \ i\
iii Vo '\ 1
\ ,____ II:
\~. -:,::-~::,::-~::"""------~'~_~~~_~ ~ Ii !
~ ~ r----- -------- 0 ~
\, \ --;;) i II
~\\\ \ li'l N~~I
I \ -,-'-
~ \ \ It' :,
,\ \ ' I
\ \ \ ,t\;: I
~ \, ! I \ 1~1
'i \ \ : r
\ \ \ i I!I !~,I
~ \ \ : +l:::I
\ \ \ I , I I
\ \ I I " 1"1;
\~ \ ! 1:1 l~ I
\.. \ : il: :~,
\ \ : " i~r--
\ \ I I
~ '-> \.._-------------- : ' :~
\ ----- r,-t'--'-
, I',
S I
\ ' -
\
,
, \
S
~~
I
I
S
I
I
,
I
I
S
,
I
I
I
I
S
I
,
I
I
,
S
I
I
\
I
I
S
I
I
I
I
I
= ========~======== -~
.!
___l____
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
.\
\
\
\
\
I
\
I
\
I
\
I
\
I
~I
~I
~I
~
~
5
s
@.
CI
I
!
S
i
I
~
~ ~
tl
g ~
~ ~ ~
,..
.
,..
....
,d
i ~~
, ~
!l ~ ~
3 ~: ~
h~~
\:\ I
\\ ~ I
\~ : f
\\ I :
\,~ ~ :
il f ~
HI,
\,( : I
II ij
I I
I I
71
I .
I I
J I
I I
I,' :
I~ j
J
I
I
I
~~
...
"I
m1(
-B
,h
5!&
!C~
i::
ii!i i
~u
]..
..'!!
N <>
~
;
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
....,
~--~------------
I
I
a
~
~
;&~~.~
m,...."'"
JHiI8lIlOOll;l) "MJlI~QNd
..."""""""''''''''''''''
r -A Af II J.1 Y.1 S ---------
ellllf3/TA
t.
.
.
ez
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO:
.~0
Planning Commission \
FROM:
Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
SUBJECT:
Tamarack Ridge Retail Center Site Plan
DATE:
May 10, 2005
INTRODUCTION
The applicant, Blaine Eggum of Valley Mining, has submitted a site plan for a proposed 25,750
square-foot retail shopping center located at the southeast intersection of Trunk Highway 3 and
CSAH 66 in Farmington (Exhibit A). The retail center is part of the Tamarack Ridge 4th
Addition Final Plat.
DISCUSSION
The proposed development is located west of the Farmington Family Townhomes and Tamarack
Ridge development. The property is zoned B-1 (Highway Business) and allows for a variety of
uses such as retail, personal and professional services, personal health and beauty services, and
restaurants (Exhibit B). The Comprehensive Plan guides the property for commercial
development. The Planning Commission reviewed the concept plan for the retail center on
March 8, 2005 as discussed in the attached minutes from the meeting (Exhibit C).
Site Plan Review
According to the City Code, site plan review and approval by the Planning Commission is
required for all commercial development. The Commission reviews general site design,
including setbacks, access, parking, landscaping, and other potential impacts to surrounding
properties. The applicant has chosen to have the site plan reviewed concurrently with the
Tamarack Ridge 4th Addition Final Plat in order to meet construction deadlines.
The applicants propose to construct a 25,750 square-foot building and provide twelve retail
spaces in the development. The building is proposed at 350 feet long by 135 feet wide. The lot
coverage for the building is 22.4% meeting the lot coverage of a maximum of 35%. The
setbacks for the building meet City requirements.
Parking requirements include 1 parking space per 200 s.f. of retail space. The total number of
parking spaces required is 129. The total number of parking spaces proposed by the applicant is
134 with 6 handicap spaces, meeting the City's parking requirements.
.
Elevations and Floor Plan
The store fronts will mostly face TH 3 with approximately four retail spaces facing south to
southwesterly. The building will be constructed with concrete blocks (Exhibit A). The building
heights range from 16 feet to 24 feet for the parapet portions of the retail space. The floor plan
consists of twelve tenant units ranging in size from 1,800 square feet to 2,700 square feet
(Exhibit A). The store entrances will face the parking lot. Loading areas for the retail spaces
will be at the rear of the retail center. The loading area is proposed at 13 feet in width and runs
parallel to the rear of the building and the proposed private street. Separation of the loading area
and the private street will be through a valley curb that runs the length of the building.
Transportation
As shown on the site plan, the main access would be from 209th Street. From 209th Street a
choice of traffic movements is proposed. The first traffic movement is north along the 22- foot
wide private street. The second traffic movement is westerly through the parking lot and to the
storefronts that face west. Additional accesses include Catalina Way (private street) from the
Farmington Family Townhome complex or Cascade Drive, a public street that intersects with
CSAH 66 to the north.
.
Jim Deanovic, developer of Farmington Family Townhomes has agreed to allow Mr. Eggum to
remove the northerly portion of Catalina Way that currently intersects with Cascade Drive and
construct Catalina Way to continue westerly and intersect with the private street (Exhibit D).
This proposal eliminates the two northerly road entrances (existing Catalina Way and the
proposed private street) being within 15 feet of each which would have caused traffic movement
problems. Additionally with the reconstruction of Catalina Way to the west, the area was
proposed to be opened in order to connect to the existing sewer line in the area. The utility
easements will remain in place for the portion of Catalina Way that will be eliminated.
Trails and Sidewalks
Randy Distad, Parks & Recreation Director, has submitted a trail and sidewalk plan for the
development (Exhibit E). An 8-foot wide bituminous trail north of 209th Street needs to be
installed by the developer. The proposed trail will continue from the existing trail at Catalina
Way and run westerly to the end of the retail center property line. Additionally, an existing
sidewalk south of Cascade Drive will be continued to the private drive by the developer.
Solid Waste
Benno Klotz, the Solid Waste Supervisor, has reviewed and approved the location of the trash
enclosures at both the north and south ends along the rear of the building. The applicant will
need to pull the containers out of the trash enclosure on trash day in order for the trucks to pick
up the refuse.
. Screening
As per Section 10-6-9 of the City Code, a 100% screen shall be required between Farmington
Family Townhomes (residential) and the retail center (commercial). As stated in Exhibit D, a 6-
.
.
.
foot tall wood fence will be constructed the length of the retail center to screen the two uses. The
fence will be located on the Farmington Family Townhome property because space on the retail
center property is limited. Mr. Eggum will construct the fence on top of a 2-foot tall berm and
provide landscaping along the fence.
Landscaping
Staff has reviewed the landscape plan for the project. The Black Hills Spruce trees proposed
along the private street need to be replaced with deciduous trees because the spruce trees will
grow into the street.
Engineering
The Engineering Division has reviewed the grading and utilities proposed for the site and has
recommended approval ofthe site plan subject to any engineering comments or requirements.
ACTION REQUESTED
Approve the Tamarack Ridge Retail Center Site Plan contingent upon engineering and planning
requirements.
Respectfully submitted,
Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
cc: Blaine Eggum, Valley Mining
~
_a",-" ,r-u'll&'I'UtU1,
b~l 4b3 1611 P.01/01
ocf {q? ~
.
City of Farmington .
Site Plan Review Application
Applicant Name: ~;p ~~/' I
Applicant Address:;1 ~5 /('rJ.1tv'C"4
Property Owner Name: fti~{ ~(l'l:/f./yC
if ( Phone: Cj)~ - 87 e - q 3 v.$
1l'(,; i/ :;";f k., Jd4) /~JI<.ri-,I!r ,1/1#55"''17/
{ . ( ,
/L(:
Property Address:
Legal Oe.cription: j cf ;;, ;;jo 1/ / ,7;;J1.1h'n:lC I; /2~.L , j), K,.'~ Cd;), MJi!
. . fit.. tic-fa net"
Description of Project: ,,'-
a.. " I! ';2 he r rk II? /
,/1SfltV'lh 0.(1 J, ' 'I '-~:, yo , 'AI
.
Property Owner Slgnatur:
Date:
~c?I-JS
Submittal Date:
Planning Commission Meeting Date:
Planning Commission Action:
Approved
Denied
Comments:
Conditions Set:
.
City Planner
Date:
TOTAL P.01
.u -I !"
i jUq il! III ~p I =~I rS
, pli l" ~ if; ice I
JArl~$ idl
IIi J I Jf I- ~
i · · .:. ~ i ~" ~
. ! 'is; g ,,1
"11 g rl i ~
Is!. lolll I" ~ · lHl ~
hj hi. ..i ;'i B E i~
~ i"a i".
a. "1-. "I~I
~ MI i p. i~1i ~~ !I!:~ i
_no I
z
:s
Ilb
~
...
S
011
~
....
.
~
Co)
.
) ,
, I
, ~
-' l_=__~~-_ ~-:,~_ ~--) =- -> ---->----->--.:=;:.:--=;:.:--::-;:.:--::-;:..=- - --
.
Ih ------ , i . r
.1 I I I'
Ii I I
mt,-,ji!
I. 1\
,
-~:=:'T1 I 1
Oil 1"
! I \
,
.
~
I
i
l
I I
I
I
IE ~ II
I ~ il
'I Iii
~o I-
I ro .;
I 1 In
I
i1
: I f I JI
:iJJ} 1 I;
, -=c;fl
_..~ il 11 ! 1 ! ! 111
--:1J IIIII II i \ ~ I
II ~ IS Iln I;
~ ~ III nil i~!;j
I I I \ I I I I II
I: I I I r I I ~
J~ ~,.I,~~~~l ~ ,8
I I I I I I I .1 W
I I I i Ii I
e .1'..l. '
I.! d__
I, g~
-
"'!
;;a
~ II'"
Ii
N iilll
:II! III
. ..
l~
j~
..
ti
ila i i!
.... ~ . I !~~;
iii ; I: ~ ii II
8 I I: ;f hI! !!
I I~ u in ~~
.U r~ If
~ i~ ~~ ! j I
.. ~i ilR; ~d
J ~1 Ii I JI
Ih
il
ht
j
M! ~
g g: ~
-I!! ~
:~ ~
~
~~
~~~
~
I in t
: ~~i ~ ~ ~
I Iii .-; ~ lE
i~1 ~ ~ !
~I. ~~
~ ~ r ~..
S
i:!l.
c:J
:;;;;:
Q
~
(:I
;
.,..
cw;
Q
>--~- > --
!:~ ~ ~
d ~ ~
aW~S ~;
~gH ~~ ~
- ~ ~
---L-~~~-:~:~-' __,__'_c_=c___' - - ~ > /';'. I >
_ _ _ , _ __, --:- ---.,.;:.... --L-- I I
--"r-' - - I, I --+---,
I __ r ~:..'__ I _ - -r>-----ib
________..._'... t "..._---..~ ;i
__ ,;.::.:::::.... k~:~,-_-,l:, """ I' T
_-,~.::-==>,,?-J 1\ \-*'-. \, ""',,? /
,,'_ ","'il I...): \ \ "
, ' : Ii::, \ \ '.!
I ( ! I I' \ \ ,r,
I i I : :: \ i i ~t:
I I I I I \ : \ I
I I :: : \ '. ' "
: IZ;~ j j ~ ) ! I
I 1 ~~ ! i (i i
I I : i: : \ i
J , I I. I \ ,
I Iii i( i:
ij1!ili\ii:
I I : ::::::
I j 1) i Iii:
, I: ::::::
1 i i i i i i i
I Iii III i ! i
: : i:: i ,:
Iii ! i i i i
~ \' \ \ I I J
II :: " :: : :
I 1'1 I' I I
i! Ii i ! i
I I I , I I I
/' i j j j j 1
!:: : : 1
( I I I I I
, ,I I I I
i! f : ! i
: : J J r :
: : ~ : : :
: : f 1 i i
I I I I' I
: f! :! i
I : II I I I
110: i! !: i
I 0: " . ' ' ,
l11 n ! ! :
J j f III j !
" f! i li! :)
I i j i l\: : i
i i!!; 11!:1
"I (J/iU i! ::
: : : r: : : :: ;~
M! : ; ! f ) 1 \: i1 11
lilJ f! l 1! : i I~
~ :;: : \ :: i= I
IJW (,)!:! !Ii
,~~: ~.*I: i, ~i i:: alH
7'1 I I I I I I ,
.:'_-J , : ",I :,: f i !
r~M'''~IH Ii 11!" I
! n ! i f!! ~ I 2 i IIII I 5";;
ill r \!~ ~ n H 3 ~ Hd5!
, ,'" I I / I ~
1 :) i: ;: r I I iti!
:: ,1: : ~ ~ i::: ~.
I I S -g ~ .. ::i
: ! i: i ::: : : : II
'\ ! 1) \ I I I I I I
~
w
~
'"'11
I
~I
~I
~I
,I
~I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
)
~
N
__I... :;~~~~~" \ ,,': ~
1" "" \-' ., ~
r " "\,,, " ~\ '
I \ ~\~,), i\:
..../ \~, l' ~\, I
/f \ \,,\ ~ \~: j
\ I~I I \ ~"
I ~.l;: ~ 1 j1r
I :::: t J III
J ;lil: i 1~
: OH:; ::;
: llH T: :::
,: ::: r l :::
: :!~::! ti:
I I '" _! ,~
~;:i l! !~
: r:!:! : ~
rJ ~:...: :~
III I I I ~
__...___J ~i.\:!:J
~~~
~ ~
o
'~Sl
=,=-f-' ,-
''''-.'''''' ",
..
.--. ....
-t~ -- , i
Ba" II
qt.' :\~ i
I. \ I
, I
\ r
'.1
@/lI1711
4-2-
~! I'll il III I !Ii I i~1 ~ !!! i
q ,$J d z
i!1I 0 t3!118rr4~
I "P"i lh I~" ~ I ~
J ~j n! ;Ji dn . ~!ii z ~
~ i~; ~ !t.effi 11 a; .....
~if :E !~ , .dJ .....
III . l! I'!!I .. I~ 1M
i:a~ ~ B !3~ j i @ .
II i~a I.!L ~ ~ II.! N
~ ~'.! 9i~; Ii l 5 ~ Wi) CC
U. 10
.. alj~ ~. w F~I ~ ~~:I ~~ tal.
~ _ul ; i nh ~ > 10
~ n~ ~ <!: ~
.Uo ~~ @.
.
B z z
~ 0 0
~ ~ ~ Z
0
~ ~ ;:::
~ W ~
Iii :r:
0 5 w
:z w Iii
:;: 8 U1
N C?
V
ll! Ji~ 11
lJ~qq
j .J~Si" ~]!
I h II I Ijl
!}f
hI
III
i!1I
~I;"
Isljll
loi;
~ BO.~
~ ,Ii:
'" _n!
I !I;
d!1
II!I~
loil
so.,.
eW"ll
~ lii=
_Ib
I i:1 ~
II rll Z ~
g {Iii g :Ii
II~ i ~ ~
I dil ~ ~
,,~
I:
..~
I~
!~
II
-::i
!I
. ..~
12
...~
!~ t
...~
I~ i:!
"::i
!!
.
"'!O>
lID ;
g@!:" ~
@:i s
Ii
!@!:~ ~
~
~
h
~
! i~~ ~ ~
d ~ ~
q~e ~ ~
isH ~ ~ ~
a:Jlj
~~
gO
f~
~
N
.
~
CC
C~IIIi3/T
.4-4
8
Ii
] ! -~ It
l JUH I
. H~ ,\ Jt
e .~ 'I' d
s 41 hi )f
I);
IIJ
~ ~ ~ 0 _ =
I~ I. Ii ~ I. ~ I~
i., iX i.. ~" i~ ~" i"
!~ !~ !: I~ !: I~ !~
Ii" !! !! !! " !! !!
iJ il II If If' ~t
h U U h U I ~i
... .... " '" " .... '"
.. tD tD tD I1l tD tD
~
la
i ~ ~
!z
::s
tlll.
Ii
is
II
~I!
I
i~
!Z
~f
;;;~
Ii
!f
~~
j h !l
I h I.
I!
" ., " "
.-00
ISI
i;U
~~Ii ..,
~:;~
. .~
z ~.<~
~ S!i~
~ lu~
II
~
~ ~
Ii .
~~ ~
B in ~
:i lil~ ~ I
6 ~f wi
~I ~ ~
~ id J
:z ~i j j
~ !!n
~~
~ - ~
dl;
~ ~j~
· ~.li
, ~~I
I ::~I
[!;,l;;""'b
m~
g ~u:
I!!! t ~
~ p; ~ ~ ~
I ;11 ~~ ti
g~h ~..
~
!!! !
g II!: 2 ~
-i!! I
I!!!:z
~I!U
(,)G:>
i~
~ II!: ~ ~
i i
~ j s
~ III *
!l:;~ ~!I
d > ~
ti~~~ ~.
~~I~ ~!
!f
-!PlI
t~
tCI~
~~
t!!.-
~fd
g~
~ j.u
i~!
.ig
~.
!HK
11'.:1
n~
J
~I
I~
,I
d!
..
=
...
I:l
...
.
i:
c
~
-m Ii
'~h ~
u.~.~~~.t U .II! ~
~~hSell"'~. SI M' ~
i;!!!!i~l~ ~~ ~si
'" .!~~!l:I'" =:
~ !:~I~.
: ~~!III
.~
.
~ f l~ .1 !~~~~~~.nm~ ! II I .' l'
~ ~. ~i! H: I ; ! :in; Ii l!f f i i,I !~ J til I, ;i
~ .1; :.! Iii r i JI J y, ]11 ~ f;1 it i IiI I ia I
... 110 ~,,'I aliI i If I' !f . I) i it,:,. JA ~J
... 111 ~ll' IJ I' ~ f t I{ 11 ja I "J all I 4 Ii I~
5 i!i ~!i! t!; I . ! I H ~~i ~;t !ii i d i. in;) it ~i I
~ I iil J} fl. t J)I II';; li fri 2 I U II ' ~ ~h II l' '
Ii ul ~ju i ~b I 1" ! II it !.I !:t m f!' Jf) ;: !~ fllti." tf i! ~
:5 ~. _ u I ! - . ~ . . - ~ - - n I.! U ht
_ hH i d "~ d .
.
N
.
,..
....
E!i/l3;!
A~{o
.
.
.
;f- (A)
'G/II//3/r 9
1 0-5-12
1 0-5-13
\
, . Conditional:
d and breakfast.
Owe ings, multi-family.
Dwell
Dwelli
Group d ycare, 13 to 16 persons.
Offices.
Public bui
Solar energy systems. (Ord. 002-469, 2-19-2002; amd. Ord.
002-483, 12-2-2002)
1 0-5-13:
B-1 HIGHWAY BUSINESS DISTRICT:
Purpose: The B-1 highway business district is intended to provide
pockets of convenience type uses along major thoroughfares that
are both pedestrian accessible from adjoining neighborhoods and
automobile accessible for short trips and through traffic.
August 2003
City of Farmington
f3{fI!8rr B
10-5-13
10-5-13
.
(B)
Bulk And Density Standards:
1. Minimum Standards:
Lot area
10,000 square feet
Lot width
75 feet
Front yard setback
30 feet
Side yard setback
1 0 feet
Rear yard setback
1 0 feet
Minimum side and rear yard abutting
any residential district
Off street parking and access drives
1 0 feet
Public and semipublic buildings
35 feet
Recreational, entertainment, commercial
and industrial uses
50 feet
.
Height (maximum)
35 feet
Maximum lot coverage of all structures
25 percent
All standards are minimum requirements unless noted.
(C) Uses:
1. Permitted:
Animal clinics.
Clinics.
Clubs.
Coffee shops.
Commercial recreational uses.
Convenience store, without gas.
.
August 2003
City of Farmington
10-5-13
EXIl/8/1 8
10-5-13
.
Health clubs.
Hotels.
Motels.
Offices.
Personal and professional services.
Personal health and beauty services.
Recreation equipment sales/service/repair.
Restaurants, class I, traditional.
Retail facilities.
Sexually oriented businesses - accessory.
2. Conditional:
Auction houses.
.
Auto repair, minor.
Auto sales.
Car washes.
Child daycare center, commercial.
Convenience store, with gas.
Dental laboratories.
Grocery stores.
Group daycare centers, commercial.
Hospitals.
Nursing homes.
Outdoor sales.
.
August 2003
City of Farmington
r!x/ll1311 5
1 0-5-13
10-5-14
.
Public buildings.
Public utility buildings.
Restaurants, class II, fast food, convenience.
Restaurants, class III, with liquor service.
Restaurants, class IV, nonintoxicating.
Solar energy systems.
Supply yards.
Theaters.
Wholesale businesses.
3. Accessory:
Parking lots. (Ord. 002-469, 2-19-2002)
.
B-2 DOWNTOWN BUSINESS DISTRICT:
Purpose: The B-2 downtown business district identifies a variety of
general commercial and higher density residential uses for the
owntown area in order to expand and strengthen the downtown as
t primary commercial district for the city, create a pedestrian
fri dly downtown, and promote the city as a cultural center.
Obj ctives of this district are to preserve historical buildings, require
high design standards, and provide a diverse mix of community
orient d commercial and cultural activities that are pedestrian
oriente and accessible to area residents.
Lot area
5,000 square feet
(B)
Lot width
50 feet
o feet
.
August 2003
City of Farmington
e;f1l/8// C
Planning Commission Minutes
March 8, 2005
Page 6
.
3.
.
4. ,*
.
\.
bridge s\!llilar to Meadow Creek. Staff replied it is not necessarily a bridge, it is
an upgra e of the roadway. Commissioner Barker was referring to a box culvert.
Mr. Fr lundetto stated there have been questions about moving the water
from one p nd to another. The City has suggested some unique engineering
structures an they will comply with what the City requires. Mr. Blundetto stated
he does not t to build a lift station if he does not have to. There are many
factors outside f their control. They are receiving pressure from the City to build
a certain numbe of homes by a certain period of time and that is good. In order
to make good on eir expectations he needs to make sure he is servicing this
property. If there i anything that does not allow for a gravity system to the east,
he needs to make s they are holding true to the expectations set. They are
enjoying a good wor g relationship with Giles Properties.
Commission Johnson as d about outlots H and G. They will be signed as a
future roadway. Chair Ro y complimented staff and the developer on working
well together. This will be nice addition to the community and they have
worked within the environme al constraints. He felt leaving outlot H open was
reasonable planning. MOTIO by Larson, second by Johnson to recommend
approval of the Parkview Ponds al plat with contingencies. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
Public Hearings
d) Review Ordinance - A-Frame Signs
Business owners have requested allowing e use of A-frame signs. This
ordinance is to allow that use in front ofthei business during business hours. The
City Attorney made some minor modification The City needs to approve the
permit with additional terms including location, uration and design. The Zoning
Officer will make sure the business has the prope . nsurance coverage. The
appeals will be heard by the Planning Commission, ot the City Council. These
signs are proposed for the B districts, the Spruce Stre t Commercial and Business
Commercial Flex zoning districts.
The only concern Chair Rotty had was ifthey block the sid alk, but with a little
monitoring that should not be a problem. MOTION by Larso second by
Johnson to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRI . MOTION
by Johnson, second by Larson to recommend approval. APIF, M ION
CARRIED.
Discussion
d) Eggum Concept Plan
Mr. Blaine Eggum of Valley Mining is proposing a retail development. CSAH 66
is to the north, and TH 3 is to the west. The retail development would include a
bank, another retail pad and some outlots. A storm water pond will take care of
any water runoff. Outlot C is Cascade Drive which is a public roadway. To the
east is Catalina Way which is a private road. The property is zoned B-1. Staff is
concerned with a one-way access road in the back of the building. This is
Planning Commission Minutes
March 8, 2005
Page 7
e;xll/b/rc
.
proposed for loading and unloading of trucks. This should be signed trucks only.
Catalina Way is in close proximity to this entrance. The Development Committee
would like to see:
1. Transportation. They are not in favor of Concept A. A north-south road
should be provided behind the retail building at a minimum width of 22 ft. The
loading areas behind the retail building should be in addition to the 22 ft.
2. 100% screening is required along the east property line of outlot A to
screen the commercial versus residential. The townhome association has possibly
consented to a fence and screening on their property.
3. Catalina Way needs to intersect at a 90 degree angle with the proposed
north-south road.
4. Identify the location of an enclosed refuse area.
5. Vacate the easement of Cascade Drive west of the north-south roadway.
6. The proposed building needs to comply with setbacks from the north
property line in Outlot A.
.
The Development Committee is not in favor of the concept plan. Mr. Jim
Ostenson, James Development Company and owner of Outlot A, stated they
wanted a reaction from the Planning Commission so they can proceed. Round
Bank has already been discussed and the developer was glad to plan a shopping
center at the same time. As far as the north-south road, they do not have a
problem with it being a private or a two-way road. They do have a concern with
the spacing in the loading area. A couple things are in jeopardy. If the building is
moved to the west it may decrease some parking and jeopardize being able to put
an L on the building and have to go back to a straight building. They can work
with staff on this. The rest of the traffic flow works great. They met with the
townhome association regarding the screening. The 22 ft. road can be pushed to
the property line and have the screening on the townhome property. They would
like to keep the L in the building. The other items on Catalina Way become
problematic. The developer does not own that road. The developer would have
to ask them to take out part of their road. They could say no. The problem is at
the north end. The refuse area is not a problem. The storm sewer area of Cascade
Drive would have to remain an easement. Round Bank will be platting to the
middle of the easement. The plat will show three lots. The developer will
comply with the setbacks.
As far as pushing the 22 ft. road to the property line, staff noted there is a
requirement where lots in any non-residential zoning district are within 100 ft. of
a residential zoning district a lOft. landscaped yard in width shall be installed. If
the developer can work with the townhomes, that may not be required.
.
Commissioner Johnson was concerned with Catalina Way and what the Fire
Marshal's response would be to a T intersection. He would be willing to look at
the number of parking spaces. Commissioner Larson suggested flipping the
building and have the back facing TH3 and the front facing east. It would open
the area and the road could be a T intersection easily. The fire lane could be
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes
March 8, 2005
Page 8
C'XIl/8/1 C
between the building and TH3 for a loading area. It would provide more room to
buffer. Mr. Ostenson stated typically you would have to have glass on that side
and there would be a double front. Tenants like to have a loading area. You
would be loading on the side that should be the most attractive. Commissioner
Larson stated he did not like the current plan. He felt traffic would not flow. The
developer stated he met with the Traffic Engineer and this was his idea. He
suggested making an L-shaped building and pull it to the front. Commissioner
Larson did not agree with it. Chair Rotty was concerned that if cars take a left
they would be using the parking lot as a roadway. He liked the original plan
better. Commissioner Richter did not like the traffic flow, but liked the front of
the building facing TH3. Along the back, if the road will be narrower, she wanted
to make sure it was wide enough for loading and unloading. Commissioner
Barker also liked to have the building facing TH3. He was concerned with the
flow of the traffic. He would rather have the road behind the building be two-lane
and work on something with Catalina Way. Chair Rotty agreed with having the
road as a two-lane. He would like to see the building stay as an L-shaped
building. He would prefer natural screening rather than a fence. Catalina Way
may be an obstacle but encouraged the developer to work with the townhome
association. Commissioner Larson stated if they do have a two-lane road, make
sure it is wide enough.
3.
Public Rea ings
d) Revi Ordinance - Delete BP (Business Park) Zoning District
Staff i roposing to delete the business park zoning district from the City code.
This is longer shown on the zoning map. MOTION by Johnson, second by
Barker to lose the public hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by
Larson, sec nd by Barker to delete the text amendment from the City Code.
APIF, MO ON CARRIED.
e) ce - Screening of Public Utility Facilities
Staffrecommen d continuation. MOTION by Johnson, second by Richter to
continue the heari to April 12, 2005. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
4.
Discussion
c) Discussion of Gravel rking Lots in Downtown Residential Districts
All residential areas have 0 have vehicles parked on hard surfaces with a 5 ft.
setback from side and rear t lines. The Mayor requested the Planning
Commission look at allowin avel parking areas adjacent to gravel alleys in
only the downtown district. A alleys are gravel. The Mayor suggested not
requiring a hard surface parking ea next to gravel. This was originally a request
from a resident. The Commission hould discuss whether to limit gravel parking
areas to the downtown district, the a thetics, how they will be maintained, the
size of the lots, the number of cars all wed, the setback from the alley, should we
look at a gravel driveway in front of a h e, the upkeep of a gravel surface, or
should the City pave all of the gravel alleys and continue to keep the hard surface
parking lot.
03/21/05 MON 16:32 FAX 9529417853 ECVCAC
Mar.lf. 2UUb 4:04PM VALLEY MINING & D
JDC
141 002
No.IOU9
p, Z
e/'I-!IB1T p
.
Valley MhUnS LLC
17595 Kenwoocl Trail
Suite 260
Lakeville, MN SS044
March 1', 2005
Jim Deanovic
FarmingtOn Family Housing LLC
Dear Jim,
.
Thank you for taking the timo to meet with myself and Jim Ostenson. AS we talked
abou~ we are proposing a retail strip center within me Ta.marack Ridge Outlot A
property, which is on the Welt aide of your townhouse property- As requested by the
City ofFarmiDgton, Catalina Way will need to tee into our proposed private street wbi;h
will IUD the property line North and South. You have agreed to allow the developer (run
Ostenson) to re-align your street and connect into the in.place utilities if needed. The
small portion of street that now ties into Cascade drive will be vacated and removed, but
the utility easements will remain in place. We understand that aU costs and work ,
associated with this will be the responsibility oithe developer. In order to meet the 1000" '/
screen ordinance, we will instaJl a vinyl fence six (6) feet in height on top of a small berm
roughly two (2) feet in height and will include shrubbery to dress it up_ The fenc:e will be
installed three (3) feet Baat of your Westerly property line. If the in ground aprinklers on
your property are impacted by either the road re-alignment or the construction of the
fence. they will be relocated at no cost to you. We are wiJling to maintain the grounds on
the West side of the newly constructed fence as we mentioned in our meeting. Thank
you for your cooperation and fDr helping us make this a better development for everyone. .
We wiJllceep you informed as we proceed along with this project. lfyou have any
questioDs I can be reached at 612-799-2724,. Thanks again,
;;rm~~
Assistant ~-L.
lames Deanovic
Date
Owner
.
Date ./
1.; 1,..1 r() ~
~
, - ,
1 -~ If
i JHH H III ~p I ; gm~
g -I; 'i~ rS ex/llolT
~ .P~i !l! jlll I;; ~ S
A Ii Ii i P ~ Iii ~ ~
II !~t !l i!!:~ ; ~
Jl; 1;~' ~ 1ift i i~ .~ ~ :Ii ~u ~I i ,... A-E
B.~: A. ~d ~ ~ .
'''<", III J'il. I i~al ! affi :!l!~ ~ g ,...
~ I.'~ ~... wl~ ...
;Ii~ r~ !.a t g.> dX: S ~ d~ n Q
.,':"".Qij:;Y':"'"iii$%' 1 ~ ~
iD\:;>",""M8'&,,):rt~h, \:) i p~ r w " ~ ~ s :z
_ul ib i m ~ ~> ~ I ; aU ~ ~ 'j :s ~
i=
I
1
a
a
a
r
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
N
I~
IIII1 j II ! \, I
X
I!:I IS I.n ~5d
m n i 5 i r I i ~n~
... ~1! II! t ; d
~.. i s tIl !i I ,.i ~
i Iii i r
'" ~~~/ l
'.
.r
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 V.fU
,
City Planner '
SUBJECT:
Hometown Addition Preliminary Plat
DATE:
May 10, 2005
INTRODUCTION
.
The applicants, Kim Friedrich and Terry Mahoney of Hometown Inc., have submitted a
preliminary plat for a proposed single-family development that would be located south of 209th
Street, east of the American Legion on Trunk Highway 3, and north of the Marschall Lines bus
garage (Exhibit A). The property currently is located in Empire Township. The City has been
working concurrently on the review of the preliminary plat and discussions with Empire
Township representatives regarding the annexation of the property. It is currently anticipated
that a proposed Joint Resolution regarding the annexation will be on the agenda for the May 10th
meeting of the Empire Town Board. Upon annexation, the property will be preliminarily zoned
A-I. A Comprehensive Plan Amendment and petition for Rezoning will have to then be
processed.
DISCUSSION
The applicants propose to develop 28 single-family lots and 2 outlots on a total of 7.64 acres
with a density of 3.53 units/acre (Exhibit B). Hometown Inc. has proposed a subdivision
development with minimum lot sizes of 6,000 square feet and minimum lot widths of 60 feet.
Therefore, Hometown Inc. will have to (a) petition for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to
allow low/medium density on the property and (b) request R-2 zoning to meet the density
requirements.
The applicants showed a number of concept plans to the Planning Commission on January 11th
and February 8,2005. At the last Planning Commission meeting (Exhibit C), the Commissioners
expressed concerns about the location of Lot 25 (Exhibit D). The Commissioners recommended
against this lot since the lot didn't match adjacent lots in size. As shown on the revised plat
(Exhibit B), the applicant has reconfigured the lots in accordance with the recommendations of
the Planning Commission. Additionally, the Commissioners indicated then support for the
. proposed R-2 zoning.
.
.
.
Site Plan
The proposed 28 single-family lots range from 6,000 square feet to 7,650 square feet in area.
Outlot A is proposed for a stormwater pond and Outlot B is a remnant piece of property that did
not meet City requirements for lot size and width.
Transportation
As shown on the plat, the only access into the proposed subdivision would be from 209th Street.
However, the potential exists for future roadway connections to (or through) the property located
to the south. The interior roadway is proposed with a 60-foot right-of-way and roadway width of
28 feet. The proposed roadway requires a sidewalk on one side of the street as per City
standards. The proposed cul-de-sac length to the southern cul-de-sac is approximately 660 feet,
requiring a variance to the City's maximum cul-de-sac length of 60 feet. The variance request is
discussed below. Both cul-de-sacs meet the City's radius requirements.
In 2001, the Planning Commission approved a variance of 910 feet for the cul-de-sac in Middle
Creek Estates to allow a total length of 1,410 feet. The roadway width in Middle Creek Estates
is 32 feet and the development totals 26 single-family lots.
Utilities
Both water and sanitary sewer were constructed along the eastern border of the Hometown Inc.
site in 2000 to service the Tamarack Ridge development to the north. The existing water and
sanitary sewer lines are located within an existing 42-foot wide utility easement on the east side
of the Hometown Inc. concept plan. Utilities for the proposed Hometown development would
connect to these existing utilities. A storm water pond is also required for the Hometown Inc.
development. The applicants have proposed a pond on the west side ofthe development that will
outlet to the Prairie Waterway to the east. The Engineering Division has reviewed the concept
plan and has provided a number of comments to the applicants concerning engineering
requirements on the plan.
Park and Trail Requirements
Randy Distad, the Parks & Recreation Director has provided comments (Exhibit E) from the
Parks & Recreation Commission (P ARAC) concerning the plat. P ARAC recommends that a
trail be located on the east side of Street A and a sidewalk be located on the north side of Street
B. The Developer has agreed with these locations. Because of the close proximity of Tamarack
Park to the north of this plat and the small size of the development, P ARAC has recommended
that the City take cash-in-lieu of park property from the applicant.
Engineering
Engineering has recommended approval of the Hometown Addition Preliminary Plat contingent
upon the satisfaction of any engineering requirements.
.
.
.
Variance Discussion
The applicants are requesting a 60-foot variance from the required 600-foot maximum cul-de-sac
length to allow for the construction of the southern cul-de-sac shown as Street A. The proposed
cul-de-sac is 660 feet in length, 60 feet over the allowed maximum of 600 feet. The 660 feet is
measured from the intersection of Street A and B.
The Planning Commission must determine whether the reasons provided by the applicant
warrant approval of the variance. The City Code provides the following criteria that must be met
for a variance to be approved:
1. Because of 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.
Due to the fact that a second access onto the curve of 20~h Street is not permitted due
to sight issues, only one access is proposed for the development, thereby creating the
need to provide two cul-de-sacs to access the lots.
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.
Because a second access onto the curve of 20~h Street is not permitted because of
sight issues, only one access is proposed for the development, thereby creating the
need to provide two cul-de-sacs to access the lots.
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 alleged hardship 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 be injurious to other property in the vicinity since the second
access will not be allowed. The variance assists in creating a safe transportation
system.
5. The proposed variance will not substantially increase the congestion of the public
streets, or increase the danger of fire, or be detrimental to the public welfare or public
safety.
The variance would not create any of the above-mentioned adverse effects.
.
.
.
6. The requested variance is the minimum action required to eliminate the hardship.
The variance request for 60 feet is the minimum action required to provide a safe
transportation system.
ACTION REQUESTED
1. Recommend approval of the Hometown Addition Preliminary Plat contingent upon the
following:
a. The property is approved for annexation into the City of Farmington.
b. MUSA is granted by the City upon annexation.
c. A Comprehensive Plan Amendment is requested and approved by the City.
d. A petition to rezone is requested and approved by the City.
2. Recommend approval of the variance request of 60 feet from the required maximum cul-de-
sac length of 600 feet.
Respectfully submitted,
t&~
Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
cc: Hometown Inc.
6'Xf!;pl/4
Hometown Addition Project Location
.
o
DO
c
,Q
U
~2
O+-'
.cOO
..... c
co 0
NU
American Legion
~
.
209th Street
Subjec Property
N
W+E
S
E
Q)
U
Q)
OJ
'0
o
-l
C
,~
.L::
+-'
C
'C
o
U
.
.
~
o
h
~
Q
Q
~
~
()
h
~
()
~
~
~
~
0..,
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
.
E)'1IIfl//G-/
\
\
\
~\
1\
-S::. L_r
, ,-I
~--
I
I
I
~-.<t~_
cnln 1011\ \
: 1\ \
:H
: r \
ql \
IIMl' "
II \
I"
If
!~: "\
: il
: I
I I 0
:.1 .... \
?"
~.
'"
S :!!
~
'"
0- +
w
~ .
'" iii
~
;::
~
F
~
e:;
=
,'-.1
CD
N
c-c-
rS::
<l:
\
~
~\
\\
\
\
\
H~ON ~ I
I
I
I
U
snoNlnnllS
:!!
..
0-
W
~
, " " ---,
"I M N" I I" N ,8
~s a p ~, S
L ontl" -1 L"'" OQ'm -.l
, ""I 'I
~I N I! I I I' ~ 18
L _ (K'.lzr" ~.-J L .....: _ _ -.l
00'"
",Ir..,
dl.ln"l
l -3' I" 1- s1i I
, ~ .J .L__-1
lj
~
S1R(ET A
l!:
z
o
~
1\,48---,
r7.L2Ll 1r4~ .. lr", I
18 'I 1.1 ,I II. ,I ~I
I~- i, 1"1 N!l II~ I'M ~I
L._...J L,~..-J L _ _ .J
o..Jt......
--'i--'----,
rn [I!f.
- - -OO~~I- - 1- J
~I
"'!
ill
10'... ......_
m
! ';;~'1
z
<
u
i I
I
,
1
1
I
'"
I~
I
I
I
I
I
I
r--
I
i~! ~ ~ ~
.m I 1-
;f.! ~~. !
Jiil Ii 1 1
i~ J~
J. .I
,: .&"~ i
r J' I
.
~
a
h
~
Q
Q
~
~
o
h
~
a
~
cxk/8rr /3-2-
~
\
~
~\
~\
\
HJ.NON
-
e
i ~
~.i
~!!
,~::!
"~~~
~f~e
~..i~
~~H
~~~~
~;..
=~~~
;J~
i~~~
~
~
~
~
>-,
~ ~ ~
~ ~ t!I
~ ~
~ .
~ ~
.....::j ~
~
~ lil
~ ~
"
~
.
.
---~
.'
/
\
\.
./
/ '
(
'-
'"
-....-.. (
,--
...._--~
...-),
/:~./
..",~,;:~:::~_.....J
~l-/lgrr8-?
i
j
i
I
,-.... i
)" i i
,//' I
,,,,/ I
!/--'" ~) I
,_/ !
.
.
I.
~
I"
- ~
ij
!
-
l
~
~
i
! (t,
t,J
~
-:1;
j i
I ~.
,
I I N
I CJ)
I r"",.':
I I =
, 52
i
~I
.
~~
HollION
-
--. -~~~~~--~~~~-
.al ~ I-
.!P. I .
"~ .:.1' . a-
h a 'I'l .~! J
<<: E:: f'I" :L ·
~ q !l J tit 1
q h 8
~ '<ll !~ H
~~
... ... f 1!I
2:i . ~.~. J h
~ a t" J" t '
..... h ~ ~
~~ ,~:a
~a I I .
Q, ~ M!f'~ ddi~
f~.a I jllB
~ II
I;
i i
.
.
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
'--i
~
~
~
~
.
~ ~ ~ ~
i i i i
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
11/8// B-1
ill ~ .
iP, ; i:
l~ Z i f
Ill! : t J
It j
11 II I i7
J J ,1 ~, ~
II
t ~Il t ~
' 'I I 5
t ij la! I _ ~
! !ttill i~I'i I ~ ~
JI11U f j ~ z'
~;iJ!iidilft ~ ~
MI;:!lfiii ~ \
l'III!'II-I!, '"....
di'l}" 1',:'8 ~ \'~~~~'
.!Idl UJ .ff \"=- l
j .-lool.'" 4 .....01 I
\
\
\
\
\
'--'I-
I
I
I
~
o
h
'--i
Q
q
~
~
o
h
~
o
~
Z
<G
0: ~!
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ,
r"l ~ ~ ~ . ~'"
J-I-t ~ ! ~< ;~ ~~~
.........,.t::J ~ :t~!:! ~<,iI
~ 8 ~~~.. 'S~ ~!i ~
U ~ di~ 12 ;~ i~~ I
UJ. ~ ~ i il ~ .i1> -
Q ~~
~~i....
"-' ."
<G
~
'\ i i\ \
I ,_
F.':"~~
.J..:::........... __._~
a ~~ 'c,_,
j--~
~. g ..3 ~ . 3
~ ~.~ "3" i ~u 3~~ ~~ Sf
if ~~~ h; ~~~ ~; ~i~ d l;
d of: ~~~ ~'I ~~ ~;g ~i ~!
~j I=i! m IIi ~i :!r !: Jt
~~ ~~ g W~3 ~g ~~ ~I~ g~ ~iig
h l&Sg :gs:d ~i ~g!i ~!i m
.~ '~~l! &~~ &~, iIi~ ~,,~ ~~ g"~
' ~~ ~~~~ ~~~ ~>~i ~~ iIi;: Q .g~
' ~;; ~">~ ~~! ~~~. ~'S ~.~ ~. ~~f
~~ ~~i.~ ~~~ ~~n ~~~ ~~i~ ~~B H
~ ~~ .~ ~ !n !.~3 ~.s ~h!l ~h ~h
~ '=' ~ ., ...
I 1\
: (I
I\\...,
Ii I 1 "j'.
I I 1
fA
i !1
: , .\','."
I ,
I
I ,
I
I .
I \
I ....r
I :/'
.::/'
b
<<t Q). ID
T
I
I
~
~
~
a
~'" I~
01
o
N
\)]J V1
- il
/
';;~~,
t./
.
.
.
:t\ 5.
t:x /l113lr- C-/
Planning Commission
Minutes
Regular Meeting
February 8, 2005
1.
Call to Order
Chair Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Members Present: Rotty, Barker, Johnson, Richter
Members Absent: Larson
Also Present: Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; Lee Smick,
City Planner
2.
Election of Officers
MOTIQ.N by Johnson, second by Barker to nominate Dirk Rotty as Chair. Voting for:
Barker, J~s6n, Richter. Abstain: Rotty. MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION ~ Barker, second by Johnson to nominate Sherry Richter as Vice-Chair.
Voting for: R.otty, Barker, Johnson. Abstain: Richter. MOTION CARRIED.
,
,
.',
\
Approval of MI~utes
a) January ll-e 2005
MOTION by\Jobnson, second by Richter to approve the January 11, 2005
Minutes. Votih$ for: Rotty, Johnson, Richter. Abstain: Barker. MOTION
CARRIED. \
Public Hearings
a) Signs for Non-Resid tial Uses in Residential Zoning Districts
The code states one mo ent sign is allowed for non-residential uses in
residential districts. F . gton Lutheran Church has requested permission to
allow a second sign because f a second entrance. At the last meeting, the
Commission discussed langua e stating "one free-standing monument sign is
allowed per street frontage if ari~ccess drive is present." Each sign shall not
exceed 50 sq. ft. in sign area and \0 ft. in height. The wall sign shall not exceed
12% of the building fal(ade or 300 ~. ft. MOTION by Barker, second by Richter
to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by
Johnson, second by Barker to send a fl\vorable recommendation to the City
Council regarding signs in non-residentl~1 uses in residential zoning districts.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED. \
\
...........~c.
3.
4.
Discussion
a) Hometown Inc. Concept Plan - Additional Concepts
Applicants: Hometown Inc., Kim Friedrich and Terry Mahoney
Staff presented a revision to the concept plan for Hometown Inc. 209th Street is
along the north side of the property, the Corinthian Cemetery is to the east, TH3
to the west, and Marshall Lines Bus garage to the south. Hometown proposed
two concepts. Staff recommended the R-2 zoning with 6,000 sq. ft. lots.
Hometown proposed to show a 30 ft. buffer along the west side and a 30 ft. buffer
Planning Commission Minutes
February 8, 2005
Page 2
~jl!lb/IC- 2-
.
along the south side near the American Legion volleyball courts. There is
ponding to buffer the area next to the volleyball courts to the west. They are
proposing 27 lots. The plan shows 28 lots, but one would have to be removed.
The second concept shows an access road from 209th Street, however the cul-de-
sac is on the east side and there is another cul-de-sac in the southeast comer.
They are proposing a pond to separate the volleyball court area from the homes
and a 50 ft. buffer along the west side to separate the commercial uses. The plan
proposes 25 lots. There are 26 lots shown, but one would have to be removed.
The original concept plan showed the cul-de-sac area with no buffer and smaller
lot lengths. The lot lengths are from 110ft. to 200 ft. in this location. Hometown
preferred the second concept. If there is a roadway to the south to hook up with
210th Street, the Development Committee understands that could happen and it
would work fine. The Development Committee was more in favor of concept one
because of the north-south roadway access, but felt concept two was also okay.
Commissioner Johnson liked concept two. Both have one lot that he is unsure of;
it is lot 25 in concept two and lot 19 in concept one. To remove either one would
make more sense. He did not like the idea of having one house with one
driveway on that street. All the other lots match. Regarding lot 11 in the original
concept plan, he asked how a house can be placed on that lot with a 30 ft. buffer.
Chair Rotty agreed it is an awkward shaped lot. Staffwill bring this back to the
developer. He felt concept two was fine with lot 25 removed.
.
Commissioner Richter preferred concept two. She also agreed it would be better
without lot 25 and without lot 26. She liked the 50 ft. buffer.
Commissioner Barker agreed with removing lots 19 and 25. He preferred concept
one. For future development he would prefer traffic going south on the straight
road versus going into a cul-de-sac and then going south. He would prefer to not
have an extension of a road going off a cul-de-sac.
Chair Rotty asked about the drainage. It is to the southeast toward the Prairie
Waterway. Engineering agreed with the placement of the ponds. At the last
meeting the Commission was split on the density. The Commission agreed with
the R-2 zoning. Chair Rotty preferred concept two and agreed with removing lot
25. He asked if the properties to the south could access the main road by
extending the road to the south. This would make a T intersection going off the
cul-de-sac.
.
Community Development Director Carroll suggested with a road going south off
the cul-de-sac for an additional access, the cul-de-sac is not needed for turning
around. If the north curb line on the east-west road is extended straight across to
the property line, you could take up the bituminous and give the lots a bigger front
yard. Chair Rotty stated people who live on a cul-de-sac enjoy the privacy and if
it is made into a through road, even with a larger front yard, they no longer have
as much privacy. Community Development Director Carroll suggested placing a
I
e:XI!/I3/i~ c -;
Planning Commission Minutes
February 8, 2005
Page 3
.
.
.
sign stating future through street on the south side of the cul-de-sac. Staff felt it
would be appropriate to let people know this could occur. Commissioner Johnson
agreed this would eliminate future problems with people not being notified.
Commissioner Barker discussed having the road to the west eventually going
south to a T intersection into the cul-de-sac. How does that work if a developer
acquires the property to the south? How much control does the City have with
regard to where the road can connect? Community Development Director Carroll
replied right now the maj or control is the property to the south lies in the
township. The annexation would be contingent on them accepting whatever
roadway configuration the City desires. If someone buys it for commercial or
industrial purpose like mini -storage that would be a significant disadvantage to bi-
sect the lot with a road like that. If a higher density residential use was
developed, that could be a benefit as a way to get to Willow Street or go to the
north. It is important to discuss this extension so when the Planning Division
looks at concept plans when they come in for the area to the south this can be
discussed as an option. Commissioner Barker felt any future problems could be
alleviated by choosing concept one now. The road access is already there. When
it is extended south, there is no one living on that road if lot 19 is removed.
People that live in the cul-de-sac will continue to live in the cul-de-sac. Traffic
would go down the east road.
Chair Rotty stated either plan could work. He was comfortable with concept two
because of the buffers. Concept one does it a little but not as nice. He could live
with concept one, but was concerned lot 11 may not be a buildable lot. The
Commission has agreed with the R-2 zoning and the developer has made great
attempts in buffering the lots to the north and the east.
Staffwill meet with the developer and their engineer to determine if they are
buildable lots, lot widths, and the number of housing pads that will fit. The
Commission would see the preliminary plat next. The biggest issue is the access
to the property to the south.
b)
Roundban Concept Plan - Variance to Side Yard Setback Question
Applicant: undbank
They have elim ated the access along TH3 and they are looking at the possibility
of a variance. T runs north and south along the west side of the proposed
building. CSAH6 s along the north side. MNDot did not approve the right-
in, right-out access 0 TH3 so they are now looking at an interior circulation
pattern which brings th around to Cascade Drive. The area is zoned B-1 and is
allowed for a ban1e A site Ian review will be done approximately the same time
as the preliminary plat. One ncern of the bank is a variance. The City requires
a 50 ft. setback for buildings alo minor arterial roadways. TH3 and CSAH66
are minor arterial roadways. They eet this requirement along TH3, however
they do not meet it along CSAH66 wne it is 30 ft. from the property line rather
than 50 ft. The bank wanted to know if the Planning Commission would be
willing to look at a variance at a future meeting. Cascade Drive is a public
JAN-12-2B0S 04:39P FROM:
I TO: 6514633966 P:2/2
X :i 3~
I.J.J J im ., I- eXI-lII3I-r .-n--\
I iO~ ~~ n ("\
.:s'"
~SI !'" w
I; ..~ V
. I I !' u
JI ..8 x /'1
L~ t:1 ~~ 0
w ,,' '. i \
J;::l ~.' '.
g~ ( j l
"
, ; . .-
, .' .... ..
"' ..
.....J..
'. Iil
.
" - ',1., , -'..
--::::-,~~~_ !L:-:~'~~'" =:, -- "i--
"' ~ .,-- --~-~~.,- ..-..........--
~~.....-::.'::,..,;-:-./-...- 1" ~~ I J -,----,-----,-
---........_~- I .. I
.. 1..==~J L I
x ----
,,--- :' - - ~.. -1 I . /. I , ~
\, ~ c.;: I ~I ./ ..F\ I .....
~: ~---*:~. :: -'~ -1l: - ~- -=- 0 F
g' .I! ,.... 1 ~...;! II ::i..1 18 \ : I . 81 .0 ':
~ ;J 1 i ,} : I I Sl8 i
..:: . .' 'j J ~::; I + I ,. Jill
! ~ l..==~~ r :..... - -\;..-L T - - ~ -' I '
\.,.....-... 'p~ r.~-15-1 ~ II' .I/\." ,...-.....\ I /', I
. \ ' . ... 8 I oS" . ..,-.-" " \
, \ 1- i ~:; I J:' ..1 I {\
\. .. 0 1._....~.~._.J I 1':- - - -..''::'''' - __ ,",/ I
~ \ '" -;:..:;r-l I/'I ---,
.>\ "'\>0 r--~j-l"1 If I ......./' I I I
,.' '. ~ "s I a " ..... .
! \. l) =a I .. --t- V "
! \ +"., L. :...:~,~ J ~ - - - I _1- r - -- - It
:" r-----' l I : I
~;..-...~ z. '.oH : ~ · I :: "j'"'
L.=-....~:.._J Ig of r- - - -i@- il~ - - --do
r--.---,,"1l1l I ; lD .! ~
I ie I I I ' I
... . I 8 I
~~ I S I I
... _ _~ _ _ J " l...l /
/ __-...L--- __~
.
""
...
l=
.
::
---
1
J
0CI'm; o..u.~'\ :
'd
\\
'-:,
,. '. ..I
.... ,/'
- -- \.._....~,...,
:. Jl..b.BQ.Dll1Ol
"
/Yo, i
.t d'l ~U
\"---3 -
_ _ _ 0Q]!il...i. _ _ t'I
, \
\-.
NOJ.lq~i
~.K l
IiDI ~.....J.
- - - r"'::' - -...
......,....
.....,...
.. . '0 N l'IOlld3:llC3 >"
i. ~
Clfl_ ,...J-
- - 1IRGL - - rWR I'
~ A
I: ..'" I
I I
. I I
oil I 5:! I
d I ci I
z :
l ~ 'Z ~3 z ~
... r
I 0 0 I
i -
l0 39'Vd NM01.3WOH
.,~ ~
· f----P ~
I j ......_....-: 011 :z
,,,,,-'-1 z 0
.."" : -
..... 11'... , -
...1'
,
...
o
....
""
(.)
H
...
'"
<
:: u
d 1IC
Z ..
::l
:or <
0
~.x
,:~/
../'
-....,...
""..
....
~
}
i
--
-
...
~~"."
9%EE9t>lS9
El:Ll S'0l/l1/10
L
.
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
e:xt//crr c .
TO:
Farmington Planning Commission
FROM:
Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director
RE:
Comments on Hometown Addition Preliminary Plat
DATE:
May 2, 2005
INTRODUCTION
A Preliminary Plat has been submitted for the Hometown Addition.
DISCUSSION
The Park and Recreation Advisory Commission held a special meeting on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 to allow the
developer an opportunity to address the trail location that the PRAC was recommending. After some discussion
with the developer, the PRAC unanimously approved recommending to the Planning Commission that the trail be
constructed in the location as identified in Exhibit A. The reason for the recommended trail location is to reduce the
number of times that a resident has to cross a street to access Tamarack Park to the north of this development.
.
The PRAC also is recommending that the sidewalk be constructed in the same location as what was proposed by
the developer and is shown in Exhibit A.
Since this is a small development, it is being recommended that cash in lieu of land be accepted from the developer
to satisfy the park dedication requirements.
There was also discussion at the PRAC meeting about the Preliminary Plat showing a trail easement on top of a
drainage easement located in the south portion of what is currently a cemetery and is outside the area of this
development. At the PRAC meeting, the developer was requested to research whether or not the trail easement had
been acquired. If the trail easement was acquired then the City would ask the developer to construct the trail out to
the Prairie Waterway where it would connect to a future trail that could be built north starting from the Bristol
Square Development to the point where the Hometown Addition trail would be constructed on the easement to the
Prairie Waterway. The City would credit this cost against the park fees owed by the developer.
ACTION REQUESTED
The PRAC is recommending to the Planning Commission that it require the Hometown Addition developer to
construct an 8 foot wide trail in the locations shown in Exhibit A.
:11/1!fo
Randy Distad
. Parks and Recreation Director
cc: Park and Recreation Advisory Commission Members
~
()
h
f---i
Q
Q
~
~
()
h
Si
()
~
~
~
~
Q.,
~
C<
;2
~
~
~.
~
~
~
.~/
~
+
J .-
'-. --D-
c
-
w
\
Ij \
\
\
,
'L
---------r",
I
I
I
...~.."","~,~ ';:~
'\"::'~~~;;~if:~~~~~~~: ~~. ,.
'~" ............ 'if 0
.\\.~:.:::;;;;~;~. '~:l
I
~~---
1 I'
: '{ ,
.Y I"',,\.
Ii I ,.......
liR1
I (\J
( 0
/ \
o
....K \
'/
'.-;\ II
l ~ ~o 0
. ,; I::l ~:i:g "'.... '" ~ :J: 11 2j
\ (:.5 \ I VI.; Q9>- ~151o! ~ 0", I-' "-:J' 15
'.-=--'3 " 00 ~",OJ dlil 8"'~ ~~ ~~~ ~o: ~if
~~ ~OA g~w w~~ ~g~ 0
...~~I w~ "-150 -'~F o:gs ~ ~o'" ~~ ~l:1
~u \ :}~ ~ji eo:l':i 15ga; Zw ,a;", ~~ 5~
,:d .~ ~j i=;~ m Ii: ~: m ~! !i
.... :/Ii 4: will ~"'~F ~~15 ili~.. :if ~o;<~ m~; 5'J.
,I m~ ~~~ w~5 ~@~ ~~ ~ u -< s~
I~:c.:~:~ ii i!l! m ii!g i! I:: !! i~l
Ji==Ci~ oz~ ~_!i !hl m 'lij III ilL ijll u!...l,
snoNtt"frura t:; r;;- -;; Vi' 4:..-.0(",:
'I ro~~ I
.....~!l..o61 .' ~,.. ~,8O.OOH I
- - - - - - -- - - 7~-+--~.l\''''f;s=''_.. .L::tlL ,,-'" .
,"--' 'J<L.lL' ~-" ~ ........1 """'''''''''';-" ";(;.:'::/'.
<( ~
: ~l\~ 4 ~/I C1!~1 ID, r ,~,~ ,}I '1'1 l 'I ~ ~ ~l
I I "" B:J: ~ I c:n Vl Y I '" I I Vl
Ii) L O'l [ ! ~I~ Cl.., --' II Ll/cro, '-;:.~~... f.....j.
L _ II I. ~ ~ -,7'..-;- - - - - - _'_ ~ ,..- -' L-J.. .:;.:,...:::--\. e
-- -~B I r /~,. 10 _ ' ! ":' Fy'" 7lT~ ..J f.~ f
t~1 ,I / " ' J~~..~ ,rlO -IT l Ii. ~,', +,' J r Ifl,/' I I ~"\\ I -r-. I i ~ ~ ..'
'I 11 << ,ii :' n J..... l",oJO/ J:. L I L J ~ !l U' ; II it
I . ./ If-'~ - w ~ - - w: 1 ~ : FG+ \ i. Tr:.:l'-':'::'1!': -=:-:j, ~ ~ -1:.., ...j--J ~ ~ .../
~I I I ..............., \ '1- l' ~{fj - 'f - L' '-..J v/' I ;:: / r-=L r... · ,...........
.>\ II I-I" ~ t' '1-0 .....--J..t J' dJl ~!:::.. ::..- -t\- .J....~_.....g:=. ~f "',
11_ f! ji it\\, ~ ~ I if o~ 'II LJC;jJ1'fF~~~.~ '--\
~ 0.- ~II I .' 8' \ v+'ID L ~'\' S"LJ L '- ij I /.,', 'm"'-
0.- I I ~ ' ! . .......:' v> "~er - I, tJ '\ I ,. :;/ '-::. I-l- ,.. \
~ II . .t,r' oo~--'iZ;.eo.oos o~ 'Ir [ . = -L <>'J\., I I .,/--6 In . // \,...........
--u=T~;r fllC] it" ~2Lf .~.'~r;S,i~~~~nml~/'
J II ~~jlh _J ~8-r~~~ , . ~~~~IL---8JL~.r=dl;1gJ f4 J
~ IJ f>- ..o::~._ ~:: . ,::-. l! smifJ' . ' '":.? .-=if "" 11 ~
fl!'li~1j '~~i ~~m'_~~~~l1~\"; i1~~ ~"-.\l~ B ,
I.h. I ,yl /;j:J: _ ~L of:j U' I ~ Jh I N J ({ ~ ), I~ ~ i 13~~~ ~ ..:\ II \".....-.....~..
---- /',:\\1,11 ~ \1 "'_;~~_~_=~::::~,i~ tY;"'".,j i ~
~I,I 'II~ ': B~ _ ~..:;) .~ "Il ((U:I,~~,.::~;~~~~~~~~~~~:i:~~::~~~~~~~~:~~~~~~~~~::~~~:I':':~l#':il " ~~d :...''-....\, I \JLJ
w lX ,........... ! 111'11 'i...__....:~f~9T..v..l.oiln6..--.......1 J" ~ D < \, I
I '~I ~ ~ ............ I11I L :~::::::::::::::.:.:::::::~i~g~.~::~::~~::::~:::..J [" I ~ u .
II ~ 00\ I \ \.:::::~~~;:::::~~~::~~~:::=::::::.~~~:::::::::::::::::::...J III ( ~})
~II' 'll~tJ ~_ _~_ ~.. 'L' ,.Jr.' ~~ "~f' "'::::::::::::::~~:=~:96'9:~~::~:::=:::::.::::::::~=~~~~? · ...............;...-..----:..... J:'
.I.L.. . - <_~ r-,. --"'- .....JJ ~ ~~ I~ ,. ....-....-.....--..... .):/
+' ~ I' <----....TI ~! ['. f 'i", I),)
- - - ~ I ' t~ ~'11 j 0/ '1.- 9 ~ '
. a ~: )'" 1\ /{ i ....~...--j : ~ / ~ -- -- --
~r-.. I ~ I ., ................... I t. ;' / ~. E; ~ I --
01 / ", ......\ ""...J ! 'I i ','..
~ // \" '..m......_........ j ') ',,/ I
./ " i \ I
< > (. \ /
..... ./ ~~, j \ /
............;::::i/ ~ i ~ / \............---...--.../
/' ....> ~ 5
/~........../ ~ ~
13 /;l
g g g g
-< < < -<
" " " JI
Z ~ i5 ~ i5
" " " JI
U U U U
~ w w ~ w
.. IJ; IJ;
III
t--=l .. 21
~ 8 21 ~ 21
0: OJ OJ OJ
{1
~$ ~~
_ d I 4:
.8 KI c ~
I ~& i
'I; _~ i
i. 11 ~ ~ ~
-3 ~ 1:'. 1l~ 0
l Zl ,:5 f~ J~ -' ~
~ glji; ;~ IIi i~ ~
~ 1 p.~ h ~ Z
~:~ iHgj: J ~
'l;sjj~ll~~!l!l ~
,lirE t hfZJ~
ih ~iJJt'i 'l;!f
!~.~ "BJi ~
llf~l11~~~]!'l;
~ ! lJ EI.hB
I'!J!~Ii~I;!! ~
I.
'1;:"
1~
JIjl
H..'I;
...HJ
Z I
~ j
0'
~ 1
~\
../. ../. oJ. oJ.
w 5 5 0 5
!::iI ~ N N :., N
~ W ~
<G..J ~ z<
6 u;~ ~ ~
w i5-<~~ =,0
UI"t:"JI:l1!i
() ~ !:lIliil o:}
VJ ~ iil~' I!i ~
rn <..:> l'! ~ ~"
V J. z I.
Q ~ ~
-l "
Zn.~'b ~ ~:!!
<G
H ~~) ~ Q) t8 ID
I. _
I I
. El i~
· ~ j{
~.~ ~!
>~ h
~~
~ ~ ~i~
~p 9~1i'
l'il:! G ~ ~
~ g 5~!1 l:J
~ ::co<:l ~
~... "'I'!~ '"
~ ~ ~~~ ~
~ ~ ;:! > 5
..
I
U
...,'
~
.
.
t:l ... 3. .lJ ~
]; ]; J ~fl
J 1 f ~
0; I;
~ I ~
:~i! KII',';:
~ ~ I ~ ~ ~I !J
~fl~ll ~ ~
~ ~ m~
"
J" 11
.11 ~ ~
!iI, d 5:
HI; ~~ ~ f
ifj: i! -
r -I + II- i
.11. I of. '"
ij:s
f~ j
H~ON ~ I
.
C
<::.
:+.
~
u
""
-J
~
1
.:;
3
S:>
'(:,
v 0::::::
p'-'
W
f s:-
-+- G>
:-s~
<::::j -:.l
<:) U
.........J ()
---J
t::s -T-
.5 I
~
~.
\:> ~\
,..) I
~ ~
,:+:,.
J1 ---
,- I-
X ~
W
..s:-
(<::l
~
~
~ ~
J<<:1 ---...
.-1::
;~ ~
'-..J _
<::l (:S
--]
~~
4: '{)
'1r~
~
\..J
.t
~
~
~
~
~
s:
..0
~
qj
~~
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
~v
\
FROM: Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
SUBJECT: Amend Section 10-2-1 of the Zoning Code to Include a Definition for Bus and Truck
Terminal and Amend Section 10-5-21 (c) Subdivision 2 of the Zoning Code to Include Bus
and Truck Terminal as a Conditional Use in the IP (Industrial Park) Zoning District
DATE: May 10, 2005
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
.
The City of Farmington is proposing to add Bus and Truck Terminal uses as a conditional use in the IP
(Industrial Park) zoning district. The City has recently been approached by developers who are interested
in constructing these types of uses, therefore, prompting the City to propose the text amendments in the
definition and use section ofthe code.
Staff is working on finalizing plans with potential buyers of these proposed uses and if the properties are
purchased, the Planning Commission will eventually review a site plan per City Code requirements. The
proposed buses and trucks would utilize the Eaton Avenue and frontage road entrances into the Industrial
Park until such time as 20Sth Street is extended to intersect with Pilot Knob Road.
DISCUSSION
The following Code amendments are proposed:
10-2-1 - Zoning Definitions
Bus Terminal: Any structure or land devoted Vrincipally to the servicing. fueling. repair. storage.
or leasing of passenger buses.
Truck Terminal -- Any structure or land devoted principally to the receipt. transfer. short-term
storage. and dispatching of goods transported by truck.
10-5-21 (c) 2 - IP Zoning District - Conditional Uses
.
Bus Terminal
Truck Terminal
ACTION REQUESTED
Recommend approval of the proposed text amendments to the City Code and forward the
. recommendation to the City Council.
Respectfully Submitted,
~.. -
,..'
, :;/:;/7.
~..
Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
.
.
.
CITY OF FARMINGTON
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING IN SECTION 10-2-1 AND
SECTION 10-5-21 (c) 2 TO DEFINE BUS AND TRUCK
TERMINAL AND ALLOW AS A CONDITIONAL USE IN THE IP
(INDUSTRIAL PARK) ZONING DISTRICT
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. Section 10-2-1 of the Farmington City Code is amended as follows by
adding a definition for the following uses:
Bus Terminal: Any structure or land devoted principally to the servicing. fueling.
repair. storage. or leasing of passenger buses.
.
Truck Terminal: Any structure or land devoted principally to the receipt. transfer. short-
term storage. and dispatching of goods transported by truck.
SECTION 2. Section 10-5-21 (c) 2 of the Farmington City Code is amended as follows by
adding the following uses in the IP Zoning District under Conditional Uses:
IP Zoning District - Conditional Uses
Bus Terminal
Truck Terminal
SECTION 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage and
publication according to law.
ADOPTED this _day of
Farmington.
, 2005, by the City Council of the City of
.
.
CITY OF FARMINGTON
By:
Kevan Soderberg, Mayor
ATTEST:
By:
David Urbia, City Administrator
SEAL
By:
City Attorney
.
Published in the Farmington Independent the _ day of
,2005.
.
.
.
.
h
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, AICP1LfG
City Planner
SUBJECT:
Text Amendment Regarding Signs for Nonresidential
Uses in the A-I Zoning District
DATE:
May 10, 2005
INTRODUCTION
The City Code currently does not allow signage within the A-I Zoning District except for
signs of the type referred to in Section 10-6-3 (B) 1 (signs permitted in all districts; see
Exhibit A). Signs such as on-premise directional signs, off-premise directional signs, real
estate signs, development project signs, banners, election signs, and public information
signs are the only types of sign allowed in the A-I district. Christian Life Church has
approached the City recently to request a new sign for their facility at 6300 212th Street
West. Staff has therefore prepared a proposed sign ordinance regarding the size and
height of signs for nonresidential uses in the A-I Zoning District.
DISCUSSION
The following are the permitted and conditional uses in the A-I Zoning District:
(C) Uses:
1. Permitted:
Agriculture.
Daycare facilities, in home.
Dwellings, single-family.
Greenhouses and nurseries, commercial.
Public parks and playgrounds.
Recreational vehicle storage facilities.
Seasonal produce stands.
Specialized animal raising facilities.
Truck gardening.
2. Conditional:
.
Accessory apartment.
Agricultural services.
Cemeteries.
Churches.
Commercial and recreational uses.
Equipment maintenance and storage facilities.
Feedlots.
Golf courses.
Kennels.
Mineral extraction.
.
Public and parochial schools.
Public buildings and facilities.
Public utility buildings.
Stables and riding academies.
Towers.
3. Accessory:
Accessory structures.
Home occupations.
Solar energy systems.
4. Interim:
Soil pulverizing operation. (Ord. 002-469, 2-19-2002; amd. Ord. 002-474, 5-6-2002)
The underlined uses (above) are considered the nonresidential uses in the A-I Zoning
District and would be required to comply with the proposed sign ordinance.
.
Christian Life Church submitted drawings of their proposed sign (Exhibit B). (The
question of LED signs will be discussed at a future Planning Commission meeting). The
Planning Commission reviewed the sign under a discussion item at the April 12, 2005
meeting. The Commissioners felt that since monument signs will become more frequent
in the Spruce Street Commercial, Business/Commercial Flex, Industrial Park, and Mixed
Use Districts to the east of the church site, the church should consider a monument sign
rather than the proposed pylon sign. Additionally, the Planning Commission agreed with
staff that the height of the sign should be similar to the height of signs for other churches
.
.
.
in the City. The Code currently allows a 10-foot height for nonresidential signs in the R-
1 District and individual commercial stores in the aforementioned business zones will be
allowed a 10- foot tall sign as well. Because of this trend towards the 10- foot tall sign, the
Commissioners felt that this would be appropriate for nonresidential uses in the A-I
Zoning District.
Additionally, staff has reviewed the sign ordinances for the Spruce Street Commercial,
Business/Commercial Flex, Industrial Park, and Mixed Use Districts and determined that
all of the signs for individual commerciallbusiness pads are allowed a 10-foot tall and
100 square foot sign area. Since the A-I Zoning District may develop in the future as
commercial or industrial, staff feels that the 100 square foot sign area would be
appropriate.
Therefore, staff proposes the following sign ordinance by adding an A-I Zoning District
to the sign ordinance and defining the sign height and area for nonresidential uses in the
A-I Zoning District:
I 0-6-3
6. A-I Zoning District
(a) Permitted Nonresidential Uses: For permitted nonresidential uses, one
freestanding monument sign is allowed per street frontage if an access drive is
present. Each sign shall not exceed one-hundred (100) square feet in sign area and
ten feet (10') in height. Signs shall be located at least ten feet (10') from property
lines and in no case shall be permitted within the thirty foot (30') triangle of visibility
at street intersections. Wall signs shall not exceed twelve percent (12%) of the
building facade or three hundred (300) square feet, whichever is less.
ACTION REQUESTED
Recommend approval of the proposed City Code amendment and forward the
recommendation to the City Council..
~
Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
cc: Christian Life Church
"EXIIIBIT A
1 0-6-3
1 0-6-3
.
(8) Signs Permitted: Upon the adoption of this section, it shall be
unlawful and a violation of this section for any person to erect,
construct, paint, alter, relocate, reconstruct, display, or maintain or
cause to be erected, constructed, displayed or maintained within the
city of Farmington any sign without first having obtained a permit
from the zoning officer.
.;f-1. Signs Permitted In All Zoning Districts:
(a) On Premises Directional Signs: Where one-way access and
egress drives are incorporated in a site plan, a sign indicating traffic
direction no more than two (2) square feet may be placed at a
dr~veway within five feet (5') of the street right of way. A directional
sign indicating the entrance to a two-way driveway may be required
where the zoning officer deems it is necessary to safely direct the
traveling public.
.
(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,
religious 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.
(c) Real Estate Signs: Temporary signage for the purpose of
selling, renting or leasing individual lots, parcels, homes or buildings
may be erected provided:
(1) One sign may be placed per street frontage and located
within fifteen feet (15') of the right of way line on the property
to be sold or leased.
(2) The size of such sign shall be a maximum of six (6)
square feet for residentially zoned property and a maximum of
thirty two (32) square feet for all other properties.
(3) The sign shall be removed upon sale, rental, or lease of
the property.
.
August 2003
City of Farmington
10-6-3
.
.
.
1 0-6-3
(d) Development Project Sign: Temporary signage for the
purpose of selling or promoting a development project or used as
construction signs shall comply with the following conditions:
(1) For development projects of thirty (30) acres or less, one
sign each at a maximum of thirty two (32) square feet of sign
area and not exceeding ten feet (10') in height may be
erected on the project site.
(2) For development projects over thirty (30) acres, two (2)
signs each at a maximum of thirty two (32) square feet of sign
area and not exceeding ten feet (10') in height may be
erected.
(3) Signs shall be permitted only after a sign permit has been
approved.
(4) Signs shall be located at least ten feet (10') from the
nearest property line on the property to be sold or leased and
in no case shall be permitted within the thirty foot (30')
triangle of visibility at public or private street intersections or
driveway intersections.
(5) Signs shall be located at least fifty feet (50') from any
existing or occupied dwelling unit.
(6) Signs shall be removed when the residential development
is sold out or the multiple dwelling project is sold or rented.
(e) Banners: Banners shall comply with the following conditions:
(1) Sign Permit Required: A sign permit is required for the
banner and shall be valid for thirty (30) consecutive days. No
more than three (3) banners may be allowed on a property.
(2) Minimum Setbacks: Banners shall be set back at least ten
feet (10') from all property lines and in no case shall be
permitted within the thirty foot (30') triangle of visibility at
public or private street intersections or driveway intersections.
(3) Banners; Public Safety: Banners shall not be erected or
maintained in such a manner as may endanger the public
safety, interfere with or obstruct pedestrian or vehicular travel,
or create a traffic safety problem.
August 2003
City of Farmington
1 0-6-3
1 0-6-3
.
(4) Banners On Streetlights: The city may place banners on
streetlights to display distinctive colors, patterns, or symbols,
used as a symbol of the city.
(f) Election Signs: Election signs shall be permitted on private
property in any zoning district with the expressed consent of the
owner or occupant of such property. The following conditions apply:
(1) Such signs may not be posted more than sixty (60) days
prior to the election and must be removed by those
responsible for the erection of the sign or the property owner
within seven (7) days following the election.
(2) Such signs must be no larger than thirty two (32) square
feet of sign area and shall not exceed six feet (6') in height
above grade.
(3) Such signs shall not be more than three feet (3') in height
within the thirty foot (30') triangle of visibility at public or
private street intersections or driveway intersections.
.
(4) Any sign found by the city to be in violation of this section
may be, without notice, summarily dismantled, removed or
otherwise rendered in compliance with this section by the city.
(5) Signs shall not be placed upon public right of way or
property, except for parks and other public areas approved by
the city council.
(6) Installation shall comply with the fair campaign practices
act.
(g) Window: Permanent signs printed or otherwise displayed
from the inside surface on an individual window shall not exceed two
(2) square feet or twenty five percent (25%) of the total window area,
whichever is greater.
(h) Public Information Signs: Public information signs shall be
allowed by conditional use permit in all districts. Sign area shall be
limited to one hundred fifty (150) square feet, and shall comply with
setback requirements in each district, and may be illuminated subject
to timing and information controls stipulated as a condition to the
conditional use permit.
.
August 2003
City of Farmington
1 0-6-3
1 0-6-3
.
(i) On Premises Signs: For the purpose of identifying or
advertising a business, person, activity, goods, products or services
located on the premises where the sign is installed and maintained,
signs shall be regulated as set forth in this subsection (8)1.
(j) No Trespassing: No trespassing signs and no dumping signs
shall not exceed two (2) square feet in area per side and not to
exceed four (4) in number per lot in R districts. In the A district such
signs shall not be located less than three hundred feet (300') apart.
(k) Awning Signs: Signs consisting of one line of letters not
exceeding nine inches (9") in height may be painted or placed upon
the hanging border only of an awning. An identification emblem,
insignia, initial or other similar design, not exceeding eight (8) square
feet in area may be painted or placed elsewhere on an awning.
(I) Painted Wall Signs: Painted wall signs shall be permitted only
on structurally sound and homogeneous surfaces. A conditional use
permit shall be required.
.
(m) Municipal Entrance Sign: A sign may be placed at the city
boundary along a roadway identifying the city name. Such sign shall
not exceed one hundred fifty (150) square feet and ten feet (10') in
height.
(n) Open House Signs: Open house signs shall not exceed four
(4) square feet, six feet (6') in height and the display of signs is
limited to the same day of the open house. Said signs may be
placed in the city right of way but not exceed three feet (3') in height
within the thirty foot (30') triangle of visibility at public or private
street intersections or driveway intersections.
(0) Temporary Holiday Signs: Temporary holiday signs and
displays relating to noncommercial messages associated with
national, state or local holidays or festivals.
(p) Garage Sale Signs: Garage/rummage sale signs on private
property not to exceed two (2) square feet in size and to be removed
on the same day the sale ends.
(q) Integral Signs: Integral signs displaying only the name,
address of the building or date of construction not to exceed two (2)
square feet.
(r) Flags: Flags or insignia of any government.
.
August 2003
City of Farmington
10-6-3
1 0-6-3
.
(s) Traffic/Street Signs: Traffic/street signs approved by the
director of public works.
2. Residential Zoning Districts:
(a) Home Occupations: For home occupations: one
nonilluminated wall sign not exceeding two (2) square feet in size.
(b) Single-Family Subdivisions And Multi-Family Complexes: For
single-family subdivisions and multi-family complexes, one
monument sign per street frontage, not to exceed fifty (50) square
feet in sign area and five feet (5') in height. Signs shall be located at
least ten feet (10') from property lines and in no case shall be
permitted within the thirty foot (30') triangle of visibility at street
intersections.
.
(c) Permitted Nonresidential Uses: For permitted nonresidential
uses, one freestanding monument sign not to exceed fifty (50)
square feet in sign area and ten feet (10') in height. Signs shall be
located at least ten feet (10') from property lines and in no case shall
be permitted within the thirty foot (30') triangle of visibility at street
intersections. Wall signs shall not exceed twelve percent (12%) of
the building facade or three hundred (300) square feet, whichever is
less.
(d) Illuminated Signs: Except for temporary signs, illuminated
signs shall be allowed in residential zoning districts for non-
residential uses. Such signs shall be illuminated only by steady,
stationary, shielded light sources directed solely at the sign, or
internal to it, without causing glare for motorists, pedestrians or
neighboring premises as outlined in section 10-6-8 of this chapter
regarding exterior lighting.
(e) Athletic Complex Scoreboards: Freestanding signs shall be
permitted on public school property as follows: Scoreboards may be
located only at the varsity and junior varsity playing fields at the
northeast intersection of Akin Road and CSAH 50 and on the parcel
at 800 Denmark Avenue. One scoreboard may be erected for each
competitive playing field and is restricted to a maximum of six feet
six inches (6'6") in height by twenty seven feet (27') in length. The
maximum height of the scoreboard at installation is twenty feet (20').
The scoreboards at the varsity and junior varsity baseball fields may
display nonilluminated advertisement panels located on the bottom
perimeter of the front of the scoreboard and shall not exceed two
feet (2') in height or twenty seven feet (27') in width. A second
.
August 2003
City of Farmington
CXIlIBIT E
speu ~ Model# s313 Double-Sided
.~t~'--:."'--"''''-
..--.;~~.
.
O,~~{!'~r?,~.... f:~ ';i~~:..f"o'J~~'i'{( 7~ (~:l\"'h/;;l(r(f:; per .'.'.'7.'," (4 flt"~?sJ
i)1t'"j'!t'i':',~." l ,~~ '-;~".~<r:il;'!-.f!".;f in'"'' (""..t,i....,.~"::..i1.f"lf; ,""u"iI.r- .~I.,r- {'i J',r:,"l'r.;:}
Ct";'.l':;;~F~ Jo .aidtr::i4- :'0.. ~.I';JtQLl-:.:.r~ ):..v.1.' .tl~.~~ {J Iji',~~>J
D.':~d~~~.s J(I iJ~iN;('i;l,:t i4'll"(i),;'i~:'~~'S. per N,It! (2 .";-r.."~"
tAr JO S(,i,.'t(;i_~l(,i jJ~' l.:t.~:tf'i;(:'-.~~'~S {'f',!" ;'lH,~ f,~ !:.1(\1
r:,M.l~.:U~;.t"..;-.. A,r:i..T;'lriiA'1<;, :r.M~lT~"':'mJ:'
LED Elecrrklll Requin:!m~nt$; J.:!'JV/ 15 r;'rit.>: .:i"'lt.'~
II) Elt-dricill It~ui~mfmfs~ 120,,"'/15 ";,:,'," "i";'::~
(t ~,(t:\;.I)!'r'f.'{it~!iJ r."t,'..(,,~~ ~;',&i ~?~:'t).iki>'!.t~ ~'i', ....'., (:.. f in: l:,~~5.)
Pixel NatriJr, 11 x ~:i, mlf~,-.'x ,.' I2(.1 t-'.::t;:i.-1c: ;:r;9"c
Weioht: :,kl:i' 't'.!: (li'~.:'.f
Trilnsmi'$siom W"(oi:'!::;,~
H4Jtt;,t'ift~'; [itJifl J.\:)"L.~ "-;;'(1) 30,000 ;;(w!t: ~-d..''-r!'
A{;cr.-f)" ~~;'iI'I'" i:",O,:il"h7.';t
!{.IL'J~.~~'p,i.i'ttd j'i..I C,,:.'!';:ir.t:"{ !t':.h,i,.fe~J
_'fIr Afu/r',~_'i~tI'.~_/S!~e,~ f:..,,)ffh! C('i~.,,~:'-a.u.J.'~~(' K tit. A;.~.,H-t)...tXl'
Gf :5'o.i.rn.!1.!~li1.1~. (('\'~1.1 ,':'~lj'.",~' b'if}l ,i1'Y.' '".ttl)~.{ G'!'~lf.'7:(~
(gFJlphl"CS s,tJbJilKt to t:hJlflgO pllf dMnt)
"
>::)
..'
'<;t'
:.
'.'\I ::::::"::.:::
.
'"
"'.t
..'
~
I
10'.1"
~OI.Cs.< Li":.c:.~, (~:"(:'::%'tS~ s~~t,.;:d. t(~ tJ':.~ :llt.-n.:.ln;:;, ~(<:h::L'I'tI~ ~t.::'n;;L ~.:J ti~f': :.~\ifl:" ,:.h~,t 1.:.,= in5l1.~It....j it, .=.:o$k-G :t"],:
.
Christian Life Church
Farmington, MN
CUp',-: Dt.j)!;I~tJ D:li~lIl aEj~:::1.
[)r.:l~..iI1Y t..=.-.: :;:0 lfla3.:1
,'.ppr::,veLl B'~':
I,mtc:
.
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
qQ
TO:
Planning Corrimission
FROM:
Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
SUBJECT:
r lfti
Site Plan Review - LSI Holdings
Location: 5147 208th Street - Industrial Park
DATE:
May 10, 2005
INTRODUCTION
LSI Holdings is proposing to construct a 20,000 square foot building on 3.38 acres for their Aerospace
Fabrication & Materials company in the Industrial Park. The location of the proposed development is at
5147 208th Street, north of 20Sth Street, east of the BDM building, and west of the Kamnann Daycare
facility. The HRA reviewed and approved the proposal on April II, 2005.
.
DISCUSSION
Attached to the packet are the Industrial Park District Requirements (Section 10-5-21) (Exhibit B), the
Industrial Park Design Standards (Section 10-6-20) (Exhibit C), and the Site Plan Review Requirements
(Section 10-6-23) (Exhibit D) for your review.
Section 10-6-23 (E) of the City Code requires that "Major Projects" be reviewed by the Planning
Commission. Under Section 10-6-23 (E) subd. 1, projects need to be reviewed by the Planning
Commission when construction of new structures with site improvements is proposed for undeveloped
land. This requirement was added to the zoning code on May 6, 2002. An application must be reviewed
within 60 days of submittal of the site plan application. The site plan application was submitted to the
City on May 4, 2005 and the review falls within the allotted time frame.
Site Plan
The Site Plan Review application is attached (Exhibit A). The company is currently located in the Airlake
Industrial Park in Lakeville. Because of their success, they have outgrown the Airlake facility and have
chosen to relocate to Farmington. They propose to construct a 20,000 square-foot building immediately
and expand another 20,000 square feet as the business in Farmington grows.
.
The building is to be constructed with insulated precast concrete wide raked wall panels (Exhibit E),
complying with the IP zoning regulations (Section 10-6-21 (A) subd. 1 (d). A dark blue band and a green
band of paint will be located towards the top of the building on the south, east and west elevations. A
loading dock is proposed on the northeast comer of the building facing the Karmann Daycare facility and
needs to be screened with landscape materials per Section 10-6-21 (A) subd. 6 (Exhibit F). The site plan
.
.
.
meets Code requirements for setbacks (Section 10-5-21 (B) subd. 1), lot coverage (Section 10-6-21 (A)
subd. 8), lot area (Section 10-5-21 (B) subd. 1, and parking requirements (Section 10-6-21 (D) subd. 2 (a)
(b) (Exhibit B).
Proposed Use
The Aerospace Fabrication and Materials use meets the permitted use of light manufacturing under the IP
Zoning District requirements. The company specializes in the design, fabrication, and installatiOI~ of a
Multilayer Insulation for Aerospace as well as Cryogenic applications. The company proposes to employ
approximately 40 people and upon expansion of the building, that number will increase to approximately
60 people.
Transportation
The site will be accessed from 20gth Street. All traffic will be funneled to Eaton Avenue and intersecting
with CSAH 50 to the south.
Solid Waste
The trash enclosure is shown to the east of the loading dock. Benno Klotz, Solid Waste Supervisor,
reviewed and approved the location of the trash enclosure.
Engineering
A storm water pond is proposed for the northeast comer of the property taking surface runoff from the
site. The Engineering Division has reviewed the grading and utilities proposed for the site and have
recommended approval of the site plan contingent to any engineering comments.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
City staff recommends approval of the LSI Holdings Site Plan contingent planning and engineering
comments.
Respectfully Submitted,
~~
Lee Smick, AICP
City Planner
cc: Patrick Anderson, LSI Holdings
.
.
.
Elk/Elf A
City of F,armington
Site Plan Review Application
Applicant Name: ~Sr. fb/J'J...ef> T, 1-. k Phone: &03- 'fL/~ -115"c)
,
Applicant Address: 3619 ~~+IC"v\-~ +l rlL~
Property Owner Na me: l--- S T- Ho IJ ,"'-.,., .I ) A. 7- c..
Property Address: S J '-/7 JD?; p.. ~~ U.a.;f
Legal Description: I--d-I l){()c.L/ oj fl'\f'lM''''-1tvv... t~d(,;~fv:c'-'( J/)8t:.b1{.r-al AJJ:f.;~
Description of Project:
5~~ ~~. ~
Property Owner Signature:
lheLL
Date: ~- J) I ()~
I
For Office Use Only
Submittal Date:
Planning Commission Meeting Date:
Planning Commission Action:
Approved
Denied
Comments:
Conditions Set:
City Planner
Date:
eXl/lElI A
.
Aerospace Fabrication and Materials Project Location
Ex. Pond
Ex. Floodplain
. 80M Project Location
D
Karrmann Oaycare
208th Street
Q) Q)
> >
<( <(
c c
0 0
c ro
0 w
E Valmont Lexington JIT Lot
-0
w
.
N
A
.
~
z ~
~ ~
g, "
'" ~.
~ Ii
o ~j
gilt
-~
~I
--_.~/z
ii!j
~;j!i ~ ~ ~
~ ~> ~~
" ~!1 S ~ a ~" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~
~1~1~~~~nh~i~~! h
~ r g ~ U hUg ~ ~ ~ ~ Pi
-' ~~1lilllh
~ i ~.~../ I : I ,\ l' I
II) . J: '" 3:. ./'\ '
. U II IT ~ i' , ~ ~ : I
.
~~ ~
~~.~
~ z~'M
g ~gil.
9 ~-'
~
~
~
~
i!
.
1IJfE~'i'~ I-'---Q~.---
~
I ~
f .--.----<
. i
l~/f.//13/rA
3 f
~ :.. '" ~ I~~
~ 9. ~ "
~ ~. <~ ~ ~
L I Hi! , ! I i!!l .
, , .! !, , ' ... I' " '! I
a! . ~ d ~ ~ i. ~~ I ..i ,1 ~ ~! ~
""Il, , Ii l' ' , <i! 'il':' I II .! ;
~ ~~ I , ~ ~ ~ 5 5 i ~ . ~ ~(!i I ~i i j ~ ~ I :
'.'! I . ; " i , , , 1 ;' . I, ,..' II I ;, ·
I: ~ ~~~; S ~~ e II < ~ · ~ I ~~ ~ U ~ I U i l ~
,! ' . ::" ; ,a , , ! n ' i !! ! , II 0 ,,' II
II i i!'i I ~ .!il! i ! ;j ; ill il' ,! II q ;
" pl' I H ! I . , I :. : !! ' 'I!d ;;I! d
~< ~ i=: i 2 ~ = ! = ~ i 5 ~ ~i ~ ! ~I' p ~ I~ i ~ :
;? ;;;; . d ; !! ~ ! ! ~ ~ ~ I~ ~ ! ~ 8 5 a ! ~ ~ S
"..".:i:<;;~- - ~~~; ~~;'
__;!~ ~3'~ ;i"":'........lIi!
_ N ~::i ;-
C'~ 'v~
t~ g
-.. (U
ntW ~NIl-NI'I'MJ
i'
i' --"
\.
---
i
!l1flJ'l1l8'NUSll(J
~~8~':':C:G';;' G~~Z :~~:~;.~:~~~i'~~.~: t~G':':)~~:~A~i:!'i'::
u
::l
~~~
~~g
Ci2~
g~~
Cii
-'
z
0<
z..J
<ll.
~~
Oz
~<
c>'"
o
1 0-5-20
10-5-21
.
3. Accessory:
~XI/ /8/1 !3
Parking lots.
4. Interim:
Mineral extraction. (Ord. 002-469, 2-19-2002; amd. Ord. 003-484,
1-21-2003; Ord. 003-498, 9-15-2003)
10-5-21 :
IP INDUSTRIAL PARK DISTRICT:
(A) Purpose: The IP industrial park district allows for existing industrial
uses within the city and promotes high quality architectural,
landscaping and site plan development standards for new industrial
development in order to increase the city's tax base and provide
employment opportunities.
(B) Bulk And Density Standards:
1. Minimum Standards:
.
Lot width
40,000 square feet
150 feet
Lot area
Front yard setback
50 feet
Side yard setback
25 feet
Rear yard setback
25 feet
Minimum side and rear yard abutting
any residential district
Off street parking and access drives
1 0 feet
Public and semipublic buildings
35 feet
Recreational, entertainment, commercial
and industrial uses
50 feet
Height (maximum)
45 feet
Maximum lot coverage of all structures
35 percent
.
December 2003
City of Farmington
10-5-21
10-5-22
.
All standards are minimum requirements unless noted.
(C)
Uses:
1. Permitted:
Light manufacturing facilities.
Office showroom.
Office warehouse.
Research facilities.
Warehousing facilities.
2. Conditional:
Child daycare facilities, commercial.
Manufacturing facilities.
.
Public utility buildings.
3. Accessory:
Parking lots.
4. Interim:
Mineral extraction. (Ord. 002-469, 2-19-2002; amd. Ord. 003-498,
9-15-2003 )
10-5-22:
1-1 INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT:
(A) Purpose: The 1-1 industrial district allows for the continuation of
existing industrial uses but not their expansion in the downtown
area.
(B) Bulk And Density Standards:
1. Minimum Standards:
Lot area
20,000 square feet
.
December 2003
City of Farmington
1 0-6-20
1 0-6-20
.
10-6-20:
INDUSTRIAL PARK DESIGN STANDARDS:
yll/grrt
(A) Building Material And Design:
1. Exterior Walls: Exterior walls of buildings to be constructed shall
consist of one or more of the following materials and shall receive
prior approval of 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 of ten (10) years.
2. Alternate Materials: Alternate exterior surface materials of
preengineered metal may be substituted in an amount not to exceed
six percent (6%) of the exterior wall surface area of each building if
the following conditions apply:
(a) Used for housing or screening equipment necessary to the
manufacturing operations;
(b) Architecturally compatible with the building as a whole as
determined by the city planning division;
(c) Compliance with any additional screening and/or landscaping
requirements of the city; and
(d) Modifications are made with prior written approval of the city
planning division.
3. Alterations To Buildings: Any alterations to buildings shall meet all
requirements of this chapter.
.
October 2002
City of Farmington
10-6-20
10-6-20
.
4. Canopies: Canopies with visible wall hangers shall not be
permitted. Design of canopies shall be in keeping with the design of
the building and shall be approved by the city prior to construction or
alteration.
5. Roof Mounted Equipment: All rooftop equipment shall be set back
a minimum of twenty feet (20') from the edge of the roof and shall be
screened. Screening shall consist of either a parapet wall along the
roof edge or an opaque screen constructed of the same material as
the building's primary vertical exposed exterior finish. Equipment
shall be painted a neutral color. The site plan shall indicate all
mechanical rooftop equipment and shall include elevations.
.
6. Loading Docks: The design of the loading docks shall be
incorporated into the overall design theme of the building and
constructed of materials equal to or the same as the principal
building. The loading dock areas shall be landscaped and/or
screened so that the visual and acoustic impacts of their function is
fully contained and out of view of adjacent properties and public
streets. The required width for a landscaped yard along a local
collector/industrial or local street is ten feet (10'). The architectural
design shall be continuous and uninterrupted by ladders, towers,
fences, and equipment. Businesses that abut County Highway 50
and/or County Highway 31 shall not construct loading docks that
front these roadways.
7. Trash Containers: Trash containers or trash compactors shall not
be located within twenty feet (20') of any street, sidewalk or internal
pedestrianway and shall be screened by a six foot (6') masonry wall
on three (3) sides of the trash unit.
....-
8. Coverage: Unless otherwise approved by the city, 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.
(B) Utilities: All buildings and structures shall be served by underground
utility distribution facilities. The installation of such utilities shall not
change the grade or contour of the city approved grading plan for the
site.
(C) Building Setbacks: No building or other structure shall be erected
within fifty feet (50') of the front property line; or twenty five feet (25')
of the side and rear property lines. If two (2) or more lots are
developed as one site, the interior common lot line shall be ignored.
.
October 2002
City of Farmington
10-6-20
1 0-6-20
.
(D)
Parking Areas:
1. Surfacing: Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, all
parking areas, driveways and loading areas shall be surfaced with
asphalt or concrete pavement following the city's engineering
standard plates. In the event said surfacing cannot be completed
due to weather or seasonal restrictions, a temporary certificate of
occupancy may be issued contingent upon the extension of the
security or letter of credit required under this chapter. All parking lots
located in the front of buildings or adjacent to street rights of way
shall be curbed.
2. Off Street Parking Spaces Required: Off street parking shall be
provided to serve each site. The minimum number of parking spaces
shall be the greater of:
(a) One space for every six hundred (600) square feet of
industrial space; and
One space for every two hundred (200) square feet of office space;
and
.
One space for each two thousand (2,000) square feet of storage
area
or
(b) One space per projected employee per shift.
3. Screening: All parking areas shall be screened as required in
subsection (F) of this section.
4. Location: Parking shall not be permitted within ten feet (10') of the
front property line (those facing any dedicated street), or within ten
feet (10') of any side or rear property line unless otherwise approved
by the city.
(E) Landscaping: All open spaces shall be dustproofed, surfaced,
landscaped, rockscaped or devoted to lawns. Not less than two-
thirds (2/3) of the required building setback area from any dedicated
street shall be landscaped with lawns, trees, shrubs and walkways of
a design approved by the city planning division. Landscaping shall
be installed within ninety (90) days of occupancy or substantial
completion of building, whichever occurs first, weather permitting.
.
October 2002
City of Farmington
10-6-20
1 0-6-20
.
The following landscape standards shall apply to all proposed
projects within the overlay zones:
1. Street Trees: Street trees shall be planted at one canopy tree per
forty feet (40') of street frontage.
2. Perimeter Parking Lots: One tree and three (3) shrubs per forty
feet (40') of parking lot perimeter frontage. Plants are to be installed
within ten feet (10') of the parking lot frontage area.
3. Interior Parking Lots: One planting island per twenty (20) parking
spaces. One tree and three (3) shrubs are required within each
planting island. The planting island shall be curbed with concrete.
4. Buffer Area: When the industrial district is adjacent to a residential
district, a twenty five foot (25') buffer is required and shall include a
six foot (6') high wooden fence and landscaping to screen the
adjacent property.
(F)
Screening:
.
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 fence and landscaping; b) landscaping and
berms; or c) a combination of both to fully screen the outdoor
storage.
2. Structure: No accessory structures (including, but not limited to,
water towers, storage tanks, processing equipment, cooling towers)
or outside equipment shall be constructed, erected or placed on the
affected property without prior approval of the city. If such approval
is granted, such structures shall be screened from public view and
the view of adjacent buildings in a manner approved by the city
planning division.
(G) Signs: All signs shall be of a design and material approved by the
city planning division. Unless otherwise approved, wall signs must be
attached to the building, and be parallel to and contiguous with its
walls and not projecting above its roofline. No sign of a flashing or
moving character shall be installed and no sign shall be painted on
.
April 2004
City of Farmington
10-6-20
10-6-21
.
any building wall. Pole signs will not be allowed. Advertising
billboards are not allowed within the overlay zone. (General
guidelines for signage available through the city planner.)
(H)
Maintenance:
1. Owners and occupants of any or all of a site have the duty and
responsibility, at their sole cost and expense, to keep the site,
including buildings, improvements and grounds, well maintained,
safe, clean and aesthetically pleasing. Such maintenance includes,
but is not limited to, the following:
(a) Prompt removal of all litter, trash, refuse and wastes.
(b) Provide such care as required to maintain all vegetation in a
healthy and aesthetically pleasing appearance.
(c) Maintain exterior lighting and mechanical facilities in good
working order.
(d) Maintain parking areas, driveways and roads in good repair.
.
(e) Prompt repair of any exterior damage to any buildings and
improvements. (Ord. 002-469, 2-19-2002; amd. Ord. 002-477,
7-15-2002)
10-6-21 :
DESIGN STANDARDS FOR SPRUCE STREET COMMER-
CIAL, MIXED USE, AND BUSINESSIFLEX ZONING DIS-
TRICTS:
(A) Site Development Standards (In Addition To Any Performance
Standards That May Be Applicable): These standards apply to the
business/flex, mixed use, and Spruce Street commercial zoning
districts unless otherwise specified. The zoning districts are depicted
on the official zoning map.
1. Outdoor Storage: All materials shall be stored and/or warehoused
within the principal building.
2. Off Street Parking: Off street parking areas shall be designed and
located to minimize their impacts on adjacent development, streets
and pedestrian corridors. Parking lot landscaping is required per this
chapter.
.
April 2004
City of Farmington
eXIi 1!3 /t ,p
10-6-22
10-6-23
.
painted over; experimental materials with no proven record of
durability or ease of maintenance in the intended application.
3. Architectural style shall not be restricted. Evaluation of the
appearance of a project shall be based on the quality of its design
and on its relationship to its surroundings, guided by the provisions
of this section. Site characteristics to be evaluated for this purpose
include building and plant materials, colors, textures, shapes,
massing, rhythms of building components and details, height,
roofline and setback.
4. Mechanical equipment, satellite dishes, and other utility hardware,
whether located on the roof or exterior of the building or on the
ground adjacent to it, shall be screened from the public view and
with materials identical to or strongly similar to building materials or
by heavy landscaping that will be effective in winter or they shall be
located so as not to be visible from any public way. In no case shall
wooden fencing be used as a rooftop equipment screen. (Ord.
002-469, 2-19-2002; amd. Ord. 002-477, 7-15-2002)
1 0-6-23:
SITE PLAN REVIEW:
.
(A) Purpose: The purpose of this section is to establish a formal site
plan review procedure and provide regulations pertaining to the
enforcement of site design standards consistent with the
requirements of this chapter.
(8) Exceptions To Review: The following shall be excepted from the
foregoing requirements:
1. Agricultural developments.
2. Single-family detached dwellings.
3. Two-family attached dwellings.
(C) Sketch Plan:
1. Prior to the formulation of a site plan, applicants shall present a
sketch plan to the zoning officer prior to filing of a formal application.
The plan shall be conceptual but shall be drawn to scale with
topography of a contour interval not greater than two feet (2') and
may include the following:
.
October 2002
City of Farmington
1 0-6-23
10-6-23
.
(a) The proposed site with reference to existing development on
adjacent properties, at least to within two hundred feet (200').
(b) General location of proposed structures.
(c) Tentative street arrangements, both public and private.
(d) Amenities to be provided such as recreational areas, open
space, walkways, etc.
(e) General location of parking areas.
(f) Proposed public sanitary sewer, water and storm drainage.
(g) A statement showing the proposed density of the project with
the method of calculating said density also shown.
2. The zoning officer shall have the authority to refer the sketch plan
to the planning commission and/or city council for discussion, review,
and informal comment. Any opinions or comments provided to the
applicant by the zoning officer, planning commission, and/or city
council shall be considered advisory only and shall not constitute a
binding decision on the request.
.
(D)
Minor Projects:
1. Review Of Minor Projects: The following shall be considered minor
projects and subject to review procedures as indicated:
(a) No Site Plan Review Required: Building projects that
comprise less than ten percent (10%) building footprint expansion
(up to 500 square feet) and/or twenty five percent (25%) increase in
the assessed value of the structure as determined by the Dakota
County assessor.
(b) Administrative Review: Building projects that comprise a 10-
30% building footprint expansion and/or 25 - 50% increase in the
assessed value of the structure as determined by the Dakota County
assessor.
2. Procedure: Administrative approval of eligible site plans shall be
subject to the following procedural requirements:
(a) Plan review will be in accordance with established
procedures including the coordinated review by other city
departments and divisions as determined by the zoning officer.
.
October 2002
City of Farmington
10-6-23
10-6-23
.
(b) Site plans involving properties within approved planned unit
developments shall be subject to applicable evaluation criteria in this
chapter.
(c) Any major variance proposal will automatically require the
entire application to be processed in accordance with the planning
commission review and city council approval provisions of section
10-3-7 of this title.
(d) Administrative approval including all applicable conditions
and requirements shall be made in writing by the zoning officer. The
applicant, in addition to all other applicable requirements, shall
submit a written acknowledgment of that approval prior to the
commencement of any development and prior to the issuance of any
permits.
(e) Any unresolved dispute as to administrative interpretation of
city code, ordinance, or policy requirements may be formally
appealed pursuant to this chapter.
(f) Site plans involving conditionally permitted uses are subject
to the review requirements found in section 10-3-5 of this title.
.
3. Certification Of Taxes Paid: Prior to approving an application for a
minor project, the applicant shall provide certification to the city that
there are no delinquent property taxes, special assessments,
interest, or city utility fees due upon the parcel of land to which the
minor project application relates.
(E)
Major Projects: A "major project" is defined as one or both of the
following and subject to review as prescribed in this section:
1 . Construction of new structures that mayor may not be in
conjunction with site improvements on redevelopment site or vacant
undeveloped lands, and/or
2. Building projects that comprise more than a thirty percent (30%)
building footprint expansion and/or fifty percent (50%) increase in the
assessed value of the structure as determined by the Dakota County
assessor.
(a) Procedures: Pursuant to MSA section 15.99, an application
for site plan approval shall be approved or denied within sixty (60)
days from the date of its official and complete submission unless
extended pursuant to statute or a time waiver is granted by the
.
October 2002
City of Farmington
!
/
I
/
1 0-6-23
1 0-6-23
.
applicant. If applicable, processing of the application through
required state or federal agencies shall extend the review and
decision making period an additional sixty (60) days unless this
limitation is waived by the applicant.
(b) Site Plan Review Requirements:
(1) Certificate: Certificate of survey.
(2) Filing; Application: Request for site plan approval, as
provided within this chapter, shall be filed with the zoning
officer on an official application form. Such application shall
be accompanied by a fee as provided for in this code. Such
application shall also be accompanied by detailed written and
graphic materials, the number and size as prescribed by the
zoning officer, fully explaining the proposed change,
development, or use and a list of property owners within three
hundred fifty feet (350') of the subject property in a format
prescribed by the zoning officer. The request shall be
considered as being officially submitted and complete when
the applicant has complied with all the specified information
requirements.
.
(3) Proof Of Ownership Or Authorization: The applicant shall
supply proof of ownership of the property for which the site
plan approval is requested or supply written authorization
from the owner(s) of the property in question to proceed with
the requested site plan approval.
(4) Recommendation On Action: The zoning officer shall
coordinate the review of the site plan, and provide general
assistance in preparing a recommendation on the action to
the planning commission.
(5) Additional Information Upon Request: The planning
commission and city staff shall have the authority to request
additional information from the applicant concerning
operational factors or to retain expert testimony at the
expense of the applicant concerning operational factors. Said
information is to be declared necessary to evaluate the
request and/or to establish performance conditions in relation
to all pertinent sections of this chapter. Failure on the part of
the applicant to supply all necessary supportive information
may be grounds for denial of the request.
.
October 2002
City of Farmington
10-6-23
1 0-6-23
.
(6) Planning Commission Appearance: The applicant or a
representative thereof may appear before the planning
commission in order to present information and answer
questions concerning the proposed request.
(7) Recommendation Of Actions Or Conditions: The planning
commission shall recommend such actions or conditions
relating to the request as they deem necessary to carry out
the intent and purpose of this chapter.
(8) Approval By Majority Vote: Approval of the site plan shall
require passage by a majority vote of the planning
commission.
(c) Certification Of Taxes Paid: Prior to approving an application
for a major project, the applicant shall provide certification to the city
that there are no delinquent property taxes, special assessments,
interest, or city utility fees due upon the parcel of land to which the
major project application relates.
(F)
Evaluation Criteria: The planning commission shall evaluate the
effects of the proposed site plans. This review shall be based upon
compliance with the city comprehensive plan, the zoning ordinance
and other city codes and policies.
.
(G) Information Requirement: The information required for all site plan
applications generally consists of the following items, and shall be
submitted when requested and specified by the zoning officer:
1. Site Plan:
(a) Certificate of survey.
(b) Name and address of developer/owner.
(c) Name and address of architect/designer.
(d) Date of plan preparation.
(e) Dates and description of all revisions.
(f) Name of project or development.
(g) Scale of plan (engineering scale only, at 1 inch equals 50
feet or less).
.
October 2002
City of Farmington
10-6-23
1 0-6-23
.
(h) North point indication.
(i) Lot dimension and area.
(j) Required and proposed setbacks.
(k) Location, setback and dimension of all buildings on the lot
including both existing and proposed structures.
(I) Location of all adjacent buildings located within one hundred
feet (100') of the exterior boundaries of the property in question.
(m) Location, number, dimensions, and type of surfacing
material of existing and proposed parking spaces.
(n) Location, number, dimensions, and type of surfacing material
of existing and proposed loading spaces.
(0) Curb cuts, driveways.
(p) Type of surfacing material. )"~
(q) Vehicular circulation.
.
(r) Sidewalks, walkways.
(s) Location and type of all proposed lighting.
(t) Location of recreational and service areas.
(u) Location of rooftop equipment and proposed screening.
(v) Provisions for storage and disposal of waste, garbage, and
recyclables.
(w) Location, sizing, and type of water and sewer system mains,
fire hydrants closest to the property and proposed service
connections.
2. Grading/Storm Water Drainage Plan:
(a) Existing contours at two foot (2') intervals.
(b) Proposed grade elevations, two foot (2') maximum intervals.
.
October 2002
City of Farmington
1 0-6-23
10-6-23
.
(c) Drainage plan including configuration of drainage areas and
calculations.
(d) Storm sewer, catch basins, invert elevations, type of
castings, and type of materials.
(e) Spot elevations.
(f) Proposed driveway grades.
(g) Surface water ponding and treatment areas.
(h) Erosion control measures.
(i) Calculation of total square footage of site to be covered with
impervious surfaces.
3. Landscape Plan:
(a) Planting schedule (table) containing:
(1) Symbols.
.
(2) Quantities.
(3) Common names.
(4) Botanical names.
(5) Sizes of plant material.
(6) Root specification (bare root, balled and burlapped,
potted, etc.).
(7) Special planting instructions.
(b) Location, type and size of all existing significant trees to be
removed or preserved.
(c) Planting detail (show all species to scale at normal mature
crown diameter or spread for local hardiness zone).
(d) Typical sections in details of fences, tie walls, planter boxes,
tot lots, picnic areas, berms and the like.
.
October 2002
City of Farmington
1 0-6-23
1 0-6-23
.
(e) Typical sections of landscape islands and planter beds with
identification of materials used.
(f) Details of planting beds and foundation plantings.
(g) Note indicating how disturbed soil areas will be restored
through the use of sodding, seeding, or other techniques.
(h) Delineation of both sodded and seeded areas with respective
areas in square feet.
(i) Coverage plan for underground irrigation system, if any.
m Where landscape or manmade materials are used to provide
screening from adjacent and neighboring properties, a cross through
section shall be provided showing the perspective of the site from
the neighboring property at the property line elevation.
(k) Other existing or proposed conditions which could be
expected to affect landscaping.
4. Other Plans And Information (May Be Required By The Zoning
Officer): '
.
(a) Legal description of property under consideration.
(b) Proof of ownership of the land for which a site plan approval
has been requested.
(c) Architectural elevations of all principal and accessory
buildings (type, color, and materials used in all external surfaces).
(d) "Typical" floor plan and "typical" room plan.
(e) Fire protection plan.
(f) Extent of and any proposed modifications to land within the
wetland, shoreland or floodplain district as described and regulated
in this title.
(g) Wetland delineation and report.
(h) Type, location and size (area and height) of all signs to be
erected upon the property in question.
.
October 2002
City of Farmington
1 0-6-23
10-6-23
.
(i) Certification that all property taxes, special assessments,
interest, or city utility fees due upon the parcel of land to which the
application relates have been paid.
(j) Solid waste removal plan.
(H) Lapse Of Approval:
1. Unless otherwise specified by the zoning officer or planning
commission as may be applicable, the site plan approval shall
become null and void one year after the date of approval, unless the
property owner or applicant has substantially started the construction
of any building, structure, addition or alteration, or use requested as
part of the approved plan. The property owner or applicant shall
have the right to submit an application for time extension in
accordance with this section.
.
2. An application to extend the approval of a site plan for up to an
additional one year shall be submitted to the zoning officer not less
than thirty (30) days before the expiration of said approval. Such an
application shall state the facts of the request, showing a good faith
attempt to utilize the site plan approval, and it shall state the
additional time being requested to begin the proposed construction.
The request shall be heard and decided by the zoning officer prior to
the lapse of approval of the original request. After two (2) years have
expired without substantially commencing construction, the site plan
shall become null and void and no further extensions can be
granted. The site plan review process must be reinitiated for projects
that have exceeded two (2) years.
3. In making its determination on whether an applicant has made a
good faith attempt to utilize the site plan approval, the zoning officer
or the planning commission, as applicable, shall consider such
factors as the type, design, and size of the proposed construction,
any applicable restrictions on financing, or special and/or unique
circumstances beyond the control of the applicant which have
caused the delay.
(I) Site Improvement Performance Agreement And Financial Guarantee:
Following the approval of the site plan required by this chapter and
before issuance of a building permit, the applicant, as required by
the city, shall guarantee to the city the completion of all private
exterior amenities as shown on the approved site plan and as
required by the site plan approval. This guarantee shall be made by
.
October 2002
City of Farmington
10-6-23
1 0-6-23
.
means of a site improvement performance agreement and a financial
guarantee as provided below:
1. The applicant shall execute the site improvement performance
agreement on forms provided by the city. The agreement shall be
approved as to form and content by the city attorney and shall define
the required work and project completion schedule and reflect the
terms of this section as to the required guarantee for the
performance of the work by the applicant.
2. The required work includes, but is not limited to, private exterior
amenities such as landscaping, private driveways, parking areas,
recreational fields structures or buildings, drainage systems, water
quality ponds, wetland mitigation, wetland buffers, erosion control,
curbing, fences and screening, and other similar facilities. The
required work shall also include all aspects of a tree preservation
plan and reforestation plan, if applicable.
3. A financial guarantee shall be submitted with the executed site
performance agreement as provided herein:
.
(a) Financial guarantees acceptable to the city include cash
escrow; an irrevocable letter of credit; or other financial instruments
which provide equivalent assurance to the city and which are
approved by the zoning officer.
(b) The term of the financial guarantee shall be for the life of the
site improvement performance agreement, and it shall be the
responsibility of the applicant to ensure that a submitted financial
guarantee shall continue in full force and effect until the zoning
officer shall have approved and accepted all of the work undertaken
to be done and shall thereby have released the guarantee or
reduced the amount of the guarantee as provided in this section.
(c) When any instrument submitted as a financial guarantee
contains provision for an automatic expiration date, after which the
instrument may not be drawn upon, the expiration date shall be
November 15. Further, it shall be the responsibility of the applicant
to notify the city in writing, by certified mail, at least sixty (60) days
in advance of the expiration date of the intention to renew the
instrument or to not renew the instrument. If the instrument is to be
renewed, a written notice of extension shall be provided thirty (30)
days prior to the expiration date; if the instrument is not to be
renewed, and has not been released by the zoning officer, another
acceptable financial guarantee in the appropriate amount shall be
.
October 2002
City of Farmington
1 0-6-23
1 0-6-23
.
submitted at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration. The term of
any extension shall be approved by the zoning officer. Upon receipt
of an acceptable substitute financial guarantee, the zoning officer
may release the original guarantee.
(d) The amount of the financial guarantee shall be established
by the zoning officer based upon an itemized estimate of the cost of
all required work. A cash deposit or irrevocable letter of credit shall
be in the amount of one hundred twenty five percent (125%) of the
approved estimated cost. The amount of any other approved
financial instrument shall be determined by the zoning officer.
(e) The applicant may submit a separate financial guarantee for
that portion of the required work consisting solely of landscaping
improvements with another financial guarantee for all other exterior
amenities and improvements which comprise the work.
.
(f) The time allowed for completion of the required improvements
shall be set out in the site improvement performance agreement. The
agreement and the financial guarantee shall provide for forfeiture to
the city to cure a default or reimburse the city the cost of
enforcement measures. As various portions of such required work
are completed by the applicant and approved by the city, the zoning
officer may release such portion of the financial guarantee as is
attributable to such completed work. Landscaping materials shall
have a two (2) year guarantee provided to the city.
(g) The applicant shall notify the city in writing when all or a
portion of the required improvements have been completed in
accordance with the approved plan and may be inspected. Upon
receipt of such notice, the zoning officer shall be responsible for the
inspection of the improvements to determine that the useful life of all
work performed meets the average standards for the particular
industry, profession, or material used in the performance of the work.
Any required work failing to meet such standards shall not be
deemed to be complete and the applicant shall be notified in writing
as to required corrections. Upon determination that the work has
been completed, including the winter season survivability of all
landscape improvements, a notice of the date of actual completion
shall be given to the applicant and appropriate action, to release or
to reduce the amount of the financial guarantee shall be taken by the
zoning officer.
(J) Minnesota State Building Code: The review and approval of site
improvements pursuant to the requirements of city adopted building
.
October 2002
City of Farmington
10-6-23
10-6-24
.
and fire codes shall be in addition to the site plan review process
established under this section. The site plan approval process does
not imply compliance with the requirements of these building and fire
codes.
(K)
Plan Agreements: All site and construction plans officially submitted
to the city shall be treated as a formal agreement between the
building contractor and the city. Once approved, no changes, modifi-
cations or alterations shall be made to any plan detail, standard, or
specifications without prior submission of a plan modification request
to the zoning officer for review and approval. Significant changes as
deemed by the zoning officer may be subject to planning commission
review and approval.
(L)
Enforcement: The zoning officer shall have the authority to order the
stopping of any and all site improvement activities, when and where
a violation of the provisions of this section has been officially
documented by the building official. (Ord. 002-469, 2-19-2002; amd.
Ord. 002-477, 7-15-2002)
10-6-24:
BED AND BREAKFAST STANDARDS:
.
(A) Intent And Purpose: The city recognizes that bed and breakfasts are
an asset to the community and help the preservation of historic
structures because the expense of owning and maintaining historic
structures has made them less suitable for single-family dwellings or
businesses. Conversion of historic structures into multi-family uses is
usually determined by the neighborhood where it is located. It is
therefore the intention of the city to limit bed and breakfast uses to
those structures where the use would benefit the surrounding area
by allowing appropriate adaptive reuse of historic structures. Bed
and breakfasts are allowed by a conditional use permit, subject to
the conditions provided under section 10-3-5 of this title and the
following conditions in the R-1, R-2, R-T, R-D and B-2 zoning
districts as regulated in this section, subject to the conditions
outlined in subsection (B) of this section.
(B) Standards:
1. The structure is listed on the National Historic Register,
designated on the city's list as a Farmington heritage landmark or
identified as an historically significant property by the heritage
preservation commission.
.
August 2003
City of Farmington
.-w
.
----'"
~
.
~
~
~
. l
.
n i
a E L 2
· !~E > i
i fi!.~S ~~
> ~1=iH h S:1
; ~~i~ ~I ~l
i~! .~ ~
5 I!i;~~~ l~
'" <
~ i:. ~~~ I~' ii:i ~; ~
i hl!li n ~ ~~ J a
z ~
I I
~.
z
o
i=
<(
>
w
-' b
w,
:r ~
I- ,
~~
-~
.....: II
r.' II
:.:: I'
.... --~J
.
.!~'
~ ~.
. L 1~
3 o~--9
~ ~~
hi~~
~ ~~ !i
~ ~~ ~
.....I.l., _ _,._ ;tOSS NW "NOJ.'JNIIoRI'f:l
I.lA 9..,1) __ ~~~~ .LS3II"U ~Ot - LI>lS
SNOU.VAil1S
~
<
;
a
~
l
~~
L?
~ il
~ ~
__..n
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
l.-~ Z
Q
I-
L~;1 ~
:: w
!f ~ ~
ii ~ ~
" III
mmjl ~ ~
! ~Ili i~i
:s 2~ a fs !
~~HH
II~
IS
~ ~
~
~
2
; I I
ul
i~
! u
>&
o.
~.
H
~I
u
~I~ !t~
Q b!) ..
~h~
:,: ._~j
:;-: ::
,::':. ::
':,,: ---u
~I~i
~t; I
~~ ,j
!?X1I/13/T C
cuc:_..~'X"'ol..ll:_"~'tW
HoOH NW "rJ'1II\non ru... 't'Q'l'MiAI'J ".HZ
":)NI ',LNi3lo1d",:I^3C O<:idd'v'
I
("l)
<(
::111 'I So:lNI010H IS1
'~O,j o:lNI011nla m3N _
!;
I;
~~
ii
\...~
-z!
S~~
o.
li~.
~~~
PH
Wi
~ in
i= . H
~ I
~ ~ ~
w ~
I- ~
~n
w ~
'~-~~l
~f; ~
.'
z
o
;::
<(
>
~ ~
w
.
I- ,
::q
3.
" ..~j
! ~i~i
~~q
~ ~~ ~
.
__ _c:o_ lV
~ II_W
---
GlI"l'I'lIol/.wR.l
...... --
g
, f'
~:ls!l~i
!I~~g~~
~i~I~~~i
~g ~ ~ = ;;&:01
i~lig!Wg$2
..=% i~~~~E~
~ ~ a ~ i ft~~ilt
~ ~~ ~ i idi~h
~ i~ h ~ ~i~!
... ri,oj... oJ oJ
.
.
"'O/EO/SO ti'IrQ_
~-=:~
N"t1= 3dV:JSONV,
...,._"'_ _.._ \lot N~'d ;ilJ.IS
~::.i?-~ J.~ii ~i ~.?eoJ.ljH~'lY:l
"''-_1 .,~ t - l71S
'V'JJ..,~--
~^ 'gVIJ -
~-
!
i
> ~ ~ ~~
~ ~ i - ~ ~ 2 l & ~~
! ~I : E H ~ ~ ~ j i ~ i ~~
i l din ! ~~~ II I !~ .
g m hh a ; ; ii i is; i I ~ II~~
, . . :~~ ;1 UI. I ,~ !' i ~l!
~ i i~~~~ P ~~ ~!~~: ~ii i ~ ~ ~iQ~
Z ~. .!. ala" 'iagf .-g ~ ~.~~
~ i : ; , j ~ ~d II ~~ i~ n i i;1 h ~~ !~~~
! II d :~i :1 fi ~i; q Il~ !i ~ !!II
0* ~ i i L i ~ II si!. ; d~ ~b
~ . :g.1 i nn .>
... wi'" ~
:
Q L
i111llJ:ul
!!;!
~
~ -. ~
~ II. ~ ti IIlX
~~ i fi jl !;2
-4~:!.~~~;
i.~ ....~ >~ b~ I-d
.~~ h2~ ~ ;'~i.
.0 "Iii!." .r:"1lI I~ ~
i~i !a ~~ :g~ E~ ~
$#ft ~--
__=::1
.- .,-..
"'~
a..
I:
<{
II!
to
~ b
u~
o ~
6 ~
u ~
~-
1Itll, llndOlI. --
?X1I/8/TF
. ~fM~~~~~'H.
ONI . .1.K:lWdOiilA30 'l'Lj./C
OC:;lddV'
:J11 '
:~O~ ~')NNla1oH IS1
I01,na m3N
.~
z
<{
..J
0-
>-
Q!
I-
m ~
I- :
% ~
o .
O! ~
"- ~
iEB
"~
..J
~
I-
Ul
o
z
\J
\i) t!
4 ~
I ~
.1
.
lD
II!
:J
o
..J
<{
::J
o
iEB
:
a..
w
0-
<t
U
ell
o
:z:
<{
..J
"
~ ;
..J .
0.. 7
w ~
J- ~
ell M
.
.
.
Llh
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:
Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director
SUBJECT:
MUSA Review Committee Recommendation
DATE:
May 10, 2005
INTRODUCTION
The MUSA Review Committee has recommended that the Planning Commission review and
recommend approval of a proposed MUSA extension for the properties identified as F, G, 3 and
4 on the attached map.
DISCUSSION
Land cannot be developed within the City of Farmington unless it lies within the Metropolitan
Urban Service Area [MUSA]. Municipal sewer services cannot be extended to any area that is
outside of the MUSA.
Subject to subsequent approval by the Metropolitan Council, the Farmington City Council
decides which parcels of land in Farmington will or will not be included within Farmington's
portion of the Met Council's Metropolitan Urban Service Area. To assist the City Council in
making such decisions, initial research and screening has (in Farmington) traditionally been
conducted by a Council-appointed MUSA Review Committee.
The MUSA Review Committee met a number of times during 2003 and 2004 and ultimately
recommended that the City Council approve and adopt a specified MUSA phasing plan, which
was subsequently incorporated into a "MUSA Allocation" map (attached) that the City Council
approved on November 15,2004. At that time, MUSA was not recommended for a number of
properties located on the east side of Farmington, primarily due to uncertainty regarding how
many acres of residential development in that area could be handled by the City's sewer system.
During the first few months of 2005, City staff members reviewed and investigated the sewer
capacity issue referred to above. That analysis resulted in a determination that the City's sewer
system could handle approximately 210 acres of residential development in the area in question.
The MUSA Review Committee was then reconvened, so that the results of the staff s analysis
could be discussed and so that the Committee could determine whether it wished to make any
.
.
.
new MUSA recommendations. The Committee met to address these topics on April 20, 2005.
After considerable discussion, including comments by and questions from the property owners
and developers who were in attendance, the consensus of the MUSA Review Committee was
that the Committee should recommend MUSA for the Devney property (F and 3 on the attached
map) and the Winkler property (G and 4 on the attached map). MUSA extension for #3 and #4
would be contingent upon annexation into the City of Farmington. The total acreage involved
(F, G, 3 and 4) is approximately 140 acres.
The Committee also expressed a strong interest in devoting additional City staff time to the
options that might exist (or that can be developed) for increasing sewer capacity on the east side
of Farmington, so that other property owners in that area would not have to defer development
until the Metropolitan Council's proposed interceptor line is constructed sometime between 2010
and 2030.
ACTION REQUESTED
Review the recommendation of the MUSA Review Committee regarding the possible extension
of MUSA to the Devney and Winkler properties (F, G, 3 and 4 on the attached map), and then
make an appropriate recommendation to the City Council.
2