HomeMy WebLinkAbout07.01.95 Planning Packet
'.
.
.
.
AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR
JULY 11, 1995
1. CALL TO ORDER - 7:00 P.M.. - OATH OF OFFICE FOR TODD LARSON
2. APPROVE MINUTES
a. June 13, 1995
3. DISCUSSION
a. Business Signs - Ordinance Amendment Requested by Chamber
of Commerce
b. Business Signs - Potential Variance Requests from Two
Business Locations
c. Comprehensive Plan Amendment
4. ADJOURN
.
.
.
AGENDA REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR
JULY 11, 1995
1. Call to Order
2. Approve Minutes
3. Discussion
a. Business Signs - Ordinance Amendment Requested by Chamber of Commerce
The enclosed paragraph has been put forward by the Chamber to provide downtown
business people the opportunity to draw attention to daily specials with sidewalk
signs. The wording is intended to replace (or, if not intended, should replace) the
paragraph in Section 4-3-3(B)5 - Portable Signs.
The emphasis of these signs would be to attract the attention of pedestrians rather
than automobile traffic. To leave both in the ordinance would be more than
confusing. The staff suggests, however, that the 2' x 3' size on the sidewalk could
interfere with pedestrian traffic and suggests a reduction to 18" x 30" in a vertical
orientation. This request is being made approximately one year after an earlier
discussion of the same issue. To adopt it as a substitute for the paragraph under
portable signs is likely to eliminate a portion of the ordinance which has been
difficult to enforce.
Recommendation
Forward a portable sign ordinance amendment to the Council with the recommendation
that it be approved at a somewhat smaller size than requested by the Chamber.
b. Business Signs - Potential Variance Requests from Two Business Locations
The two attached letters refer to a specific request and to the report of an
ordinance violation, respectively. Both deal with reasonably recent actions by the
Planning Commission and/or the City Council. If there is a belief that either one
justifies a variance, the Commission should develop an amendment that can be
forwarded to the City Council for final action.
Recommendation
Reaffirm the sections of the Code in question. If Budget Oil believes that the bank
needs better identification, it could eliminate its own pylon sign. The wall signs
at Budget Mart appear to be particularly effective in attracting attention from the
north.
c. Comprehensive Plan Amendment
The City of Farmington has entered into a Multi-City GIS Project which will
dramatically improve base map production and reproduction. The most important
reference documents from the perspective of planning are the Zoning Map and a
~.
.
, . .
Citywide Land Use Plan Map, but a Commercial/Industrial Inventory Map will also be
useful. The major obstacle to preparing a Land Use Plan Map is that the last
Metropolitan Council approved Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1982. The draft plan
prepared in 1990 was never adopted and it, too, is now out of date. In order to get
the planning process initiated anew, Staff has prepared a land use plan map based
upon the 1982 plan as amended by plat and PUD approvals since that time, and would
like to begin discussions on various aspects of the City Plan by referring to a
planning map prepared for the City Council/Planning Commission/Park Board workshop
held early last Spring. To provide some insight into how much information will be
required, the "Metropolitan Council Guidelines for Reviewing Local Comprehensive Plan
Amendments" of January, 1994, has been duplicated for your consideration. It would
be helpful to keep the meeting as "loose" as possible, providing opportunities for
questions as well as discussion of ideas about the direction of future Farmington
growth and renewal.
&~ 4J 1J,~
.
.
Charlie Tooker
City Planner