Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12.13.94 Planning Packet , . . . . I AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR DECEMBER 13, 1994 1. CALL TO ORDER - 7:00 P.M. 2. APPROVE MINUTES - November 8, 1994 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. 7:00 P.M. - Conditional Use - 413 Elm Street - Duplex with Rental Rooms b. 7:15 P.M. - Bridgeport Financial] Inc. - Request to Rezone Land North of City Center from B-3 to R-3 c. 7:15 P.M. - Bridgeport Financial, Inc. - Request to Approve a PUD for Construction of Rosebrier Apartments North of City Center d. 7:15 P.M. - Bridgeport Financial, Inc. - Request to Discuss Preliminary Plat of Vermillion River Housing North of City Center 4. DISCUSSION a. James A. Maxa Request to Add Auction Houses as Conditional Use in B-1 and B-2 Districts b. Proposed Revision to Mineral Extraction Definition - Reduce Number of Requests for Conditional Use Hearings c. Maximum Accessory Building Size in Residential Districts '" . . . fl., AGENDA REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR DECEMBER 13, 1994 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVE MINUTES 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. 7:00 P.M~ - Conditional Use Request - 413 Elm Street The subject building was a single family dwelling which was granted a conditional use to be used as a rooming or boarding house. The concept involved one individual together with his son and mother. The idea was to convert the duplex home into a single family unit with rooms to rent with the mother acting as landlord. In a very short time, the property had a building code violation which involved the individual and his son moving into the basement without creating egress windows for the basement bedrooms. The same question came up with a subsequent sale of the building and now the new owner would like to put in egress windows, recognize the basement apartment and maintain the rental rooms that were created on the second floor. Accessory apartments may be created on lots of 10,000 square feet in the R-3 District provided that the apartment will not create a density greater than 14 units per acre. In this particular block, there are 8 residential structures with only one recognized duplex. This means that the request would add one additional living unit for a total of 10 in a block which] according to zoning, could accommodate 28 units. The request, in effect, is an attempt to legitimize a situation that was created when the original rooming house was approved. The existing structure has been well maintained in a neighborhood of single family homes. It may be useful to reduce the density in this block to R-2 which would place a cap on accessory apartments at 16 units rather than the current 28. This possible could be addressed during the next update of the City Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission does have an opportunity here to improve an existing situation by requiring a landscape plan that will emphasize screening of the large parking area and garage at the rear of the property. Reconnnendation Approve the creation of a duplex/rooming house at 413 Elm Street subject to the professional preparation of a landscape screening plan for the existing parking lot. b, c, d. 7:15 P.M. - Bridgeport Financial - Vermillion River Housing Bridgeport Financial, Inc., the developer of Farmington City Center, has requested consideration of an expanded Rosebriar Apartment complex north or Farmington City Center, east and south of the river and west ,a . . . ~lanning Agenda Report - 12/13/94 - Page 2 of the railroad right of way. The proposal will require rezoning from B-3 Heavy Business to R-3 High Density] a PUD and platting to eliminate the confusing land ownership pattern. It is the recommen- dation of staff that all a~tion should be continued until the proposal has settled into a form that has minimized questions about the site. For example] the proposal being circulated for review shows 100 units on a site plan that does not relate to the site survey and does not clearly indicate how the proposed layout will relate to existing development in Farmington City Center. In addition, the utility layout available late Thursday suggests a site plan that includes very little usable green space and, by the estimate of City staff] will require several setback variances. It is the understanding of staff that even this layout will be redesigned and the number of townhouses on site will be reduced from 10 to 6. It is noted that the original proposal for the site assumed an area of 5 acres which would allow the site to be developed as a PUD. The. survey actually indicates a site of 4.2 acres which means that a PUD can be justifieq if the area utilized as an access through Farmington City Center is committed to the site, together with the north half of the remaining Main Street when that is dedicated. Another approach would be to allow the parkland which adjoins the site to be used for the purpose of creating a land area to qualify for PUD densities. The latter can be justified because the parkland will never have another use. However, securing access by dedicatinq land within City Center appears to serve the additional purpose of clarifying access to the apartment cluster in case the shopping center eventually passes to different ownership. Recommendation Table action on all three requests until the Developer has settled upon a plan that eliminates the current confusion about the proposed development. 4. DISCUSSION a. James A. Maxa Request - Add Auction Houses as Conditional Use in B-1 and B-2 Districts Mr. Maxa has requested time on the agenda to explore options with the Commission. If there is a favorable reaction to listing auction houses in the B-1 District, there is likely to be a specific request under consideration at the next meeting. It is the opinion of staff that auction houses should be limited to the conditional use section of the B-1 District, since these areas are likely to be the only sites which will offer adequate off street parking. As indicated in an earlier discussion, Mr. Maxa is anticipating rental within the Townsedge Shopping Center. b. Proposed Revision to Definition of Mineral Extraction This proposed amendment was returned to the Commission for discussion when the City Engineer recommended that the upper end of direct action by the City Council should be limited to 25,000 cubic yards rather .. Planning Agenda Report - 12/13/94 - Page 3 . than 75JOOO cubic yards as previously recommended. His reasoning comes from two previous experiences with mineral extraction which were in the 40,000 to 50,000 cubic yard range. Enclosed is a copy of the agenda report for the November 8th meeting. c. Maximum Accessory Building Size in Residential Districts The City Council returned this recommendation to the Commission since there was great reluctance on the part of some to use utility service as the sole criteria for allowing oversized buildings. Opinions ranged from enforcing the existing ordinance to establishing a flexible upper limit on building size based upon the size of lot together with a reflection of adjoining land use. The staff believes that the existing ordinance provides enough flexibility for areas that are either residential or about to become so. The Council has rejected the approach recommended by the Commission without giving clear direction as to the type of upper limit flexibility that would be acceptable. One suggestion was to structure a sliding scale for acceptable over- sized garages as follows: Lot Size Conditional Use Accessory Building Size to 10,000 sq. ft. 1000 sq. ft. 15,000 sq. ft. 1150 sq. ft. 20,000 sq. ft. 1300 sq. ft. . 25,000 sq. ft. 1450 sq. ft. 30,000 sq. ft. 1600 sq. ft. 35,000 sq. ft. 1750 sq. ft. 40,000 sq. ft. and over 1900 sq. ft. To ensure continuity on how we reached this point, the agenda report from November 8th is enclosed. tY~ 1! 1t~ Charlie Tooker City Planner .