Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979 I I I 1~~ MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR JANUARY 16, 1979 1. The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 7:30 P.M. Present: Chairman Shirley, Commissioners Hanson and Hoyer Absent: Commissioners Carey and Nelson, Commissioner Nelson arrived at 8:00 P.M. Also Present: Administrator Ford and Planner Tooker 2. The first matter on the agenda was the review of the new proposed Flood Plain Control amendment to the City Zoning Ordinance. This amendment had been written by City Planner Charles Tooker in conformance with the requirements of the Federal Housing and Urban Development Dept., and with the State Department of Natural Resources, both of whom have jurisdiction in matters relating to Flood Plain Con- trol and the National Flood Insurance Program. In the general discussion that followed with Mr. Tooker, several points were made regarding the new amendment. First of all it was found that a good portion of the existing C-l Conservation Zoning districts would now be replaced with a general Flood Plain District that additional and more stringent control requirements were provided for, that the ordinance is complicated and in some instances expensive, and that it did, to some extent, reduce the Vermillion River Flood Plain and Flood Fringe areas which was to the advantage of Farmington. It was decided that Mr. Tooker had done an excellent job in writing of the amendment and particularly in resisting the insistence on the part of both HUD and the DNR that a separate ordinance be written rather than integrated into our existing ordinance. The Planning Commission decidedly had serious misgivings concerning section three, which would require a formal hydraulic study by a registered professional engineer from any individual seeking to build in the flood fringe or in the general flood plain district. The City Administrator then reviewed with the Planning Commission the broad picture and background of the flood plain control ordinance. It was stated that throughout the United States many communities were subject to serious and frequent flooding of dwellings and other structures constructed in the flood plain. Because of the high risk of flooding to which these structures were subjected, commercial insurance underwriters logically and rightfully determined the risk too high to write insurance on these buildings. The Federal government then became involved in response to pressure put upon the Congress, and a Federal Flood Plain Insurance Program was underwritten by the Federal government. For a municipality to be enrolled in this program, which in turn qualified property owners in the community for coverage, the community must agree to institute certain controls to prevent additional buildings from being built in the high risk flood areas. The controls mandated on the community by the Federal government and reinforced by State law through the enforcement of the DNR, emerged as the Flood Plain Zoning Ordinance, presently before the Planning Commission. The City Administrator suggested that the City might give some thought to the idea of resisting the further and spurious encroachment of Federal and State government into the traditional prerogatives of local government, although it would be desirable for the City to have some controls, it might not be necessary that the City adopt verbatum, all of the requirements mandated by Federal and State government. The commission was informed that staff had contacted HUD in Chicago and had asked for a computer readout which would inform the City of the activity which has taken place within the last two years under the Federal Flood Insurance Program. That readout showed that only one structure within the City of Farmington was covered under a Federal Flood Plain Insurance Policy. This lead one to ask the question is it necessary for the City to be dictated to by the State and Federal government when there may not be a problem to be solved or a hardship to be reme~ied_shou~d all of the tax payers of Farmington be put to the additioJ1~1 .cost of-'implementing Federal and State requirements to the apparent benefit of only~one property owner. 136 Motion by Hanson, second by Shirley that the Planning Commission find that the proposed Flood Plain control zoning amendment is well written, is workable although complicated and expensive, that it is consistent with both Federal and State requirements for flood plain control and that the commission entertains I serious misgivings about certain provisions of the amendment and particularly in regard to section 3, and that the consideration of Federal and State in- volvement in local affairs be a matter for the council to decide. APIF, motion carried. 3. The commission then reviewed a proposed time schedule which would guide the City Planner and Planning Commission in the ongoing project of amending the Farmington Comprehensive Plan which would bring it into conformance with the Metropolitan Council Land Use Development Plan. The Commission agreed that the first two items in the work program, i.e., population projections and development policies (densities) should be taken up at the meeting of Feb 20, 1979 from 7:30 P.M. to 9:30 P.M. 4. The next agenda item concerned a review of the status of the official street map preparation being undertaken by the City Engineer in conjunction with the City Planner. It was pointed out that this item falls within the previously discussed work schedule in the month of June and that coordination between the City Planner and the Engineer should be aimed at completion of that project prior to that time. 5. The commission considered the request of P.H. Feely & Sons, Inc., 420 2nd Street, to amend their special exception to permit the erection of a grain leg at that site. It was shown that the proposed construction would fall between two existing bins and would not be closer to any lot line than any existing structure. In the discussion with Mr. Feely it was determined that the pro- I posed new leg would approach 100 ft. in height and that therefore, under the ordinance, would require a height variance of from 451 to 1001. Motion by Hoyer, second by Nelson that the commission determine that the proposed con struction is consistent with the special exception previously granted and therefore is permitted, and that a public hearing be set for 9:00 P.M., February 20, 1979 in the matter of a request for height variance of from 451 to 1001. APIF, motion carried. 6. The City Administrator then asked the Planning Commission to review his interpretation of the zoning ordinance involving continuing non-conforming land use. This involved the intention of the property owner, Chuck Weisbrich, to obtain from the City Council a subdivision waiver for his property located at 315 Pine Street. The property is presently in the B-3 Heavy Business Zoning District. There exists on the property, a residence which is presently a continuing non-conforming use. It was the administrators opinion that the subdividing of this property would not nullify or in any way, affect the status of that continuing non-conforming use. The Planning Commission with that in- terpretation and Mr. Weisbrich was instructed to direct his request for a subdivision waiver to the City Council. 7. It was noted for the record that this was the last meeting of Chairman Roger Shirley and of Commissioner Ed Nelson, both of whom had informed the council that they declined to accept reappointment. 8. Motion made and seconded to adjourn at 9:30 P.M. I !?pe:/full~ ~ubmi~t~ If ~~.Ic=./J~ Wi II iamJ. For;;' City Administrator WJF/kf APPROVED :L 'I 7~1 ---~ I I I 1 ~1 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR FEBRUARY 20, 1979 1. The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 7:30 P.M. Present: Members Hansen and Hoyer and members-elect, Gerten and Carey Also Present: Administrator Ford, Finance Director Hawes and Planner Tooker 2. The oath of office was administered by Administrator Ford to members-elect Kenneth Gerten and William Carey. 3. Motion by Hoyer, second by Carey to approve the minutes of January 16, 1979. APIF, motion carried. 4. Motion by Carey, second by Gerten to appoint Hansen Chairman and Hoyer Vice- Chairman of the commission for 1979. APIF, motion carried. 5. City Planner, Charles Tooker presented to the commission information regarding Urban Service Areas as they related to the study of amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. There was considerable discussion as to: (a) The population estimates for Farmington by the Metro Council; (b) the possible use of approximately 2000 acres along County Road 31 in the north part of the city; and (c) the difference between units per acre and density per acre. a) Tooker indicated that he was in general agreement with the population estimates by the Metro Council but indicated the numbers would increase if development occurs at the average of 40 units per year as per the citys actual experience. b) The commissioners indicated a desire to know what type of development will be occurring in the Northwest area of the city along Co. Rd. 31. The commissioners will invite all property owners in this area to the April meeting to discuss the owners plans for developing the area. c) Planner Tooker indicated disagreement with the current policy on units allowed per acre. He indicated that under the present policy up to 10 units could be developed on one acre of land. After some discussion Tooker was directed to prepare some recommendations and informational material on the question of units per acre and report back to the Board at their March meeting. 6. The commission noted receipt of a letter from State Representative Steve Sviggum noting his interest in community affairs and his willingness to work on local problems. 7. Chairman Hansen opened the public hearing on the variance request by P. H. Feely and Son at 9:04. No one appeared for or against the variance request. The hearing was closed at 9:05. The commission discussed the requested height variance of from 45 feet to 100 feet to permit the erection of a grain leg to serve existing grain storage bins. Motion by Hoyer, second by Carey to approve. APIF, motion carried. 8. The commission briefly discussed the Reisinger Excavating Storage building that had been put up with certain special conditions stipulated. It was noted that compliance with the special conditions has apparently not been met. 9. The commission deferred review of the annual work schedule, etc. l 'JO .J..:..'~ 10. Motion by Carey, second by Gerten to adjourn at 9:18 P.M. APIF, motion carried. I Respectfully submitted, ~~~ John Hawes Finance Director APPROVED 'fnaJ..J!.h ~D I ,Q7Q JH/kf I I I I I 1?-9 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MARCH 20, 1979 1. The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 7:30 P.M. Present: Chairman Hanson, members Carey, Feely, Gerten and Hoyer Also Present: Administrator Ford and Planner Charles Tooker 2. Motion by Carey, second by Gerten to approve the minutes of February 20, 1979. APIF, motion carried. 3. The City Administrator administered the Oath of Office to the newly appointed Commissioner, Donald Feely, Jr. 4. The council discussed the petition of Mr. and Mrs. Lawrence Vorwerk, for a home occupation zoning certificate at 20192 Akin Road West, for a part-time pet grooming service. The matter was discussed. Motion by Hoyer, second by Carey that the home occupation zoning certificate be approved in accordance with Title 10, Chapter 10, section 8 of the city code. APIF, motion carried. 5. At 7:45P.M. the Chairman opened the work session with City Planner Charles Tooker dealing with the land use phase of the amendment to the city comprehensive plan. A lengthy discussion and exchange of ideas followed. At the conclusion of the work session, the commission set a special meeting for an additional work session with Mr. Tooker for 7:30 P.M., April 10, 1979, said meeting to be open to the public. 6. The commission took up a petition of Mr. and Mrs. Dale Marinenko of 5784 Upper 183rd Street for a side-yard set back variance of from 30 ft. to 15 ft. It was explained that this matter had been before the commission on at least two previous occasions and Mr. and Mrs. Marinenko were present. Motion by Hoyer second by Carey that the petition for variance be denied on the basis that a hardship indigenous to the property had not been shown as required by Title 2, Chapter 4, Section 3 of the City Code. APIF, motion carried. 7. In a preliminary advisory meeting with the commission, Mr. Harold Rice pre- sented his proposal to the commission to convert the existing former Frederick- Willys office building at 27 5th Street, to a combination Bowling Lane/Restaurant/ On-Sale Liquor Club. Considerable discussion followed and there seemed to be a consensus that what Mr. Rice was proposing was compatible with the neighborhood but that certain amendments to the zoning ordinance would be necessary. Mr. Rice stated that in his opinion the success of his proposal would be predicated upon his obtaining an on-sale liquor license. It was suggested to him that he consult with the City Attorney to determine whether or not his proposal in regard to restaurant would meet the requirement of the State Liquor Law. It was further agreed that Mr. Rice, after talking with Mr. Gorgos, would prepare the necessary documents and drawings, bring them to City Hall, and the Chairman would be amiable to calling a special meeting of the planning commission to consider this matter. 8. The Planning Commission took note of a letter written by the City Administrator to Mr. James Reisinger, dated March 5, 1979, regarding his inquiries concerning the possible amendment to his existing special exception at 20522 Akin Road, which sets forth the procedures he should follow and the approximate timing required. 9. Motion made and seconded to adjourn at 10:30 P.M. APIF, motion carried. Respectfully submitt~d, ~ ~~"'110',.... ? ~ /j (Y1:' /Ol,q-.c William J. Ford APPROVED G~ '7 City Administrator WJF/kf I I 141 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MARCH 27, 1979 1. The meeting was called to order at 5:15 P.M. by the Chairman Present: Chairman Hanson, members Carey, Feely, Gerten, Hoyer Also Present: Administrator Ford 2. The Chairman took note of the fact that official mailed notice had been sent to all members 48 hours prior to this meeting. 3. The purpose of this meeting was to consider the proposal of Mr. Harold Rice to operate a bowling alley at the site of the former Fredrick-Willys, Inc. offices at 27 5th Street. Mr. Rice explained that he was considering this operation in conjunction with Mr. Clyde Thompson who had entered into an option to purchase the property and who would, in turn, if the proposal prevailed, lease the property to Mr. Rice. Mr. Rice stated that an on-sale liquor license would be economically essential to his proposal. The Administrator had prepared an analysis of Mr. Rice's proposal and it consisted, essentially, of the following steps required in order to accommodate what he was proposing: 1) That a liquor license be granted by the City Council 2) That the Planning Commission recommend and the council concur in the amending of the zoning ordinance by adding as a special exception 'Commercial recreation' in the 1-1 district. 3) That the Planning Commission grant a special exception to Mr. Rice for a commercial recreation and making a finding of fact that the eating and drinking was an accessory to the primary use and subordinate to it. 4) That in granting the special exception they include in and validate the existence of, a front lot setback variance of from 40 ft. to 6 ft. In a lengthy discussion among the members of the Planning Commission and with Mr. Rice and Mr. Thompson, there appeared to be a consensus on the Planning Commission that the proposed land use would not be incompatible with the general neighborhood and would not be detrimental to the intent of the ordinance. There was also a general feeling that matters should be conducted in such a way that the ordinance would not ultimately be amended unless this proposal were a certainty. Mr. Rice pointed out that time was of the essence because of the finance arrangements which were underway and the effective dates of various options. The Planning Commission took note of the fact that if they acted on this matter at this time that the recommendation could go to the council at their meeting of April 2, 1979, at that the council could set a public hearing in the matter as early as April 16, 1979. Motion by Carey, second by Gerten that the Planning Commission recommend to the council that the Zoning Ordinance be amended by including as a special exception in the 1-1 zoning district, Commercial Recreation, contingent upon all of the obstacles in this proposal having been overcome and all necessary permits, licenses, etc., having been granted. APIF, motion carried. 4. Motion by Hoyer, second by Carey that the Planning Commission set a public hearing for 7:30 P.M., April 17, 1979 to consider the request of Mr. Rice for a special exception to permit a Commercial Recreation land use in the 1-1 district contingent upon the council amending the zoning ordinance. APIF, motion carried. III 5. Motion made and carried to adjourn at 5:45 P.M. ..7p,^ful!y S/bmi ~ /J ~~-jt: ~~ William J. For City Administrator WJF/kf APPROVED ~ /01 (9 '19 I I I I J!~ MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL APRIL 10, 1979 1. The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 7:30 P.M. Present: Chairman Hanson, Members Feely and Gerten Absent: Members Carey and Hoyer Also Present: Administrator Ford and Planner Tooker 2. Motion by Gerten, second by Feely that the minutes of March 20, and March 27, 1979, be approved. APIF, motion carried. 3. The purpose of this meeting was to work with City Planner Charles Tooker in the continuing amendments to be made to the City Comprehensive plan. Mr. Tooker presented a written narrative and description of suggested modifications along with appropriate drawings and maps. Philosopy.s, policies, and details were discussed. A few of the questions which arose and to which the Planning Commission will have to find suitable answers include the following: 1) How can the City reconcile the principle of private ownership expressed in an owners right to put his land to its highest and best purpose with the apparently mitigating philosophy that the public has an interest in the use to which private land is put to. 2) What specific changes in our Comprehensive plan, zoning ordinance, and subdivision ordinance have been mandated by the legislature? By the Metropolitan Agencies? 3) Should the City policy be constructed in such a way as to incourage the channeling of all development into areas which can be served by Municipal services. 4) Should the existing provision in the zoning ordinance allowing utility transitional plats be rescinded. 5) Should the permitted density in all residential zoning districts be decreased? 6) Should multiple dNellings not be allowed in any single family residential district? 7) Is the preservation of agriculture a legitimate specific objective for a municipality and can the public interest for such be shown? 8) Should plats be permitted only where municipal services are available? 9) What should then be the minimum lot size outside of plats for residential structures? 4. The regular meeting of the Planning Commission which would normally be held on the 3rd Tuesday of May, May 15, 1979, was changed to Thursday May 17, 1979, 7:30 P.M. 5. Motion made and seconded to adjourn at 9:45 P.M. Re.;,ectJllY ...submi tted, V~Ii~~.1fi;df Wi II i am J. Ford 7 ., City Administrator ,- I \ APPROVED zqY'u..L /7 I Jq 79 WJF/kf I I I 145 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR APRIL 17, 1979 1. The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 7:30 P.M. Present: Chairman Hanson, Members Carey, Feely, Gerten, Hoyer Also Present: Administrator Ford 2. Motion by Gerten, second by Feely to approve the minutes of April 10, 1979 as presented. APIF, motion carried. 3. The Chairman, at 7:30 P.M., opened the public hearing, notice of which had been earlier published, to consider the request of Mr. Harold Rice, for a special exception, Commercial Recreation, in an 1-1 Zoning District, located at 27 South 5th Street. The commission was informed that at the Council meeting the preceding night, Mr. Rice had been granted a Liquor License in conjunction with his proposed development at this address with certain contingencies and that the council had amended the zoning ordinance upon recommendation of the Planning Commission to allow for this type of special exception, also with certain conditions. There being no objection from the audience, the Chairman then closed the discussion to the audience and brought the matter back to the table for discussion. There appeared to be considerable consensus among the members of the commission, that what Mr. Rice proposed, was compatible with the surround~ng area, met the require- ments of the zoning ordinance as amended, required no variances, and in general complied with the intent of city ordinances. Motion by Carey, second by Gerten to grant to Mr. Harold Rice the special exception for a commercial recreation land use at 27 South 5th Street, which as the main land use and finding that the restaurant operation and on-liquor operation to be accessory uses at the same address, contingent upon the following conditions: a) That the two separate parcels involved, i.e. parking lot, parcel No. 14-03100-022-11 and bowling center building, parcel No 14-03100-023-11 be joined into a single, inseparable parcel and filed with the County. b) That Mr. Rice enter into a development agreement with the city immediately. c) That Mr. Rice execute the terms of the agreement within 90 days of the date of the agreement. APIF, motion carried. 4. The next agenda item was an advisory meeting with Mr. Wally Hilgenberg, accompanied by associates Jim Thompson and Eileen Boyless regarding a proposed development in the North half of section 24, involving parcel No. 14-02400-013-25 which included single family reseidences on the west side of Co. Rd. 31 and on the East side and immediately adjacent to Co. Rd. 31. The balance of the proposed development provided for a mobile home park at the extreme east end and south portion of the property, including some C-l zoning district at the extreme east end. Through a general discussion of the proposed development, there was a consensus on the part of the Planning Commission that the density now provided for by the zoning ordinance in the C-l zoning district should not be deviated from, which is presently one structure per 80,000 sq. ft. Mr. Robert Stegmaier, who was in the audience, was asked as owner of adjacent property, whether he would object to a mobile home development? He replied that he would not. Several topics were discussed in a general way, including soil conditions, development density, neighborhood compatibility, availability of municipal services, street design and construction, and street access. There was an expression, on the part of at least a majority of the Planning Commission that a mobile home park developed in that area, would not be looked upon favorably. No action taken. [;1 .. .l'i,b 5. The next item on the agenda was the request of Mr. Jeff Thelen for a I wholesale business special exception in the B-2 zone, located at 308 ELM Street, which is the site of the former Bell Beer Distributorship. Motion by Feely, second by Carey to set a public hearing in the matter for 7:30 P.M. May 17, 1979. APIF, Motion carried. 6. The next item was the request of Mr. Lewis McVicker for a side yard setback variance at 719 Centennial Court. After a lengthy discussion between members of the commission and Mr. McVicker, it was agreed upon that the Administrator would arrange for the Building Inspector to meet with Mr. McVicker in an attempt to (a) definitely establish where the lot line is and (b) determine exactly, if any, the amount of variance needed. 7. Motion made and seconded to adjourn at 11:15 P.M. Respectfully submitted, d.' d- /J ~fllC'~"A~ Wi II iam J. Ford-' City Administrator APPROVED 0'lh? I WJF/kf I I I I I 1 At MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MAY 8, 1979 1. The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 7:30 P.M. Present: Chairman Hanson, Menbers Carey, Feely, Hoyer Absent: Menber Gerten Also Present: Administrator Ford 2. The minutes of April 17, 1979 were deferred. 3. The Chairman opened the public hearing on the request of Jeff Thelen for a special exception for a warehouse land use in the B-2 zoning district. The Building Inspector informed the Planning Commission that he saw no problems which could not be met in this request. Motion by Hoyer, second by Carey that the special exception be granted with the following conditions: 1) That within one year the applicant submit plans to the Planning Commission which provide for the construction of a Retail Service Area and a Retail service door fronting on Elm Street and That the large garage type doors remain closed during normal operating periods and 3) That the noise and dust control be within the requirements of the ordinance APIF, motion carried. ,:)Y,?-.t.\1C1 6 2) 4. The Chairman then opened the public hearing on the request side lot set back variance at 701 5th Street. The request for back was from 30 ft. to 12 ft. to permit the construction of a Feely, second by Carey that the side lot set back be granted. of Tom Jensen on a the side lot set garage. Motion by APIF, motion carried. 4. The Chairman then opened the public hearing on the request of Mr. Louis McVicker for a side lot set variance at 719 Centennial Court, from 30 ft. to 16 ft. Motion by Hoyer, second by Feely that the set back be granted. APIF, motion carried. 5. The Planning Commission then considered the preliminary plat of Westview Acres 3rd Addition, submitted by Mr. Gil Gilbertson. It was pointed out that the City Council, at their meeting the previous night, had set a public hearing in this matter anticipating approval of the Planning Commission, as a result of their opinions expressed during the advisory meeting. Motion by Hoyer, second by Carey that the preliminary plat plan of Westview Acres 3rd Addition, be recommended to the council for approval. APIF, motion carried. 6. The meeting previously scheduled for May 17, 1979, 7:30 P.M. was changed to May 24, 1979, 7:30 P.M. which will be a workshop with City Planner, Charles Tooker, primarily centering on discussion of housing to be included in the revised City Comprehensive Plan. 7. Motion made and seconded to adjourn at 9:30 P.M. R;pe,full: ~ubmitt~ /1 V~~~ William J. For7 City Administrator APPROVED 51;;),4 )1q WJF/kf I I I l/t~ MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MAY 24, 1979 1. The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 7:30 P.M. Present: Chairman Hanson, Members Carey, Feely, Gerten, Hoyer Also Present: Administrator Ford and City Planner Tooker 2. Motion by Hoyer, second by Carey that the minutes of April 17, 1979 be approved. APIF, motion carried. 3. Motion by Gerten, second by Feely that the minutes of May 8, 1979 be approved with the following corrections: The last part of paragraph 3, be changed to read as follows "Motion by Hoyer, second by Carey that the special exception be granted with the following condition: 1) That the large front garage-type door remain closed during normal operating periods. 2) That the noise and dust control be within the requirements of the ordinance. APIF, motion carried." APIF, motion carried. 4. The commission reviewed the request of Mr. Jim White for a side yard set back at 512 Oak Street to permit the construction of a residential garage. Motion by Carey, second by Hanson to set this matter on for a public hearing for 7:30 P.M., June 19, 1979. APIF, motion carried. 5. The balance of the meeting was devoted to discussions with the City Planner concerning his assignment to recommend revisions to the Comprehensive Plan. The discussion this evening dealt with land use and housing. It was pointed out that the next meeting on June 19, 1979, will deal with the transportation section of the Comprehensive plan and it was suggested that the Engineer attend that meeting along with the City Planner. 6. Motion made and seconded to adjourn at 9:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, ~w.~ Wi 11 iam J. Ford --, - City Administrator APPROVED 1./1);1 WJF/kf 1 ~l I MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR J U N E 1 9, 1 979 1. The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 7:30 P.M. Present: Chairman Hanson, Commissioners Carey and Hoyer Absent: Commissioners Feely and Gerten Also Present: Administrator Ford, City Planner Charles Tooker, Engineer Cook 2. The Chairman opened the previously published public hearing at 7:30 P.M., to consider the request of Jim White at 512 Oak Street, for a side lot set back variance of from 6 ft. to 3 ft., for the construction of a detached garage. Motion by Carey, second by Hoyer that the variance be granted. APIF, motion carried. 3. Motion by Hoyer, second by Carey that the minutes of May 24, 1979 be approved as presented. APIF, motion carried. 4. Mr and Mrs Dale Marinenko appeared before the commission to request that their petition for a sidelot variance previously denied, be reconsidered. Motion by Hoyer, second by Carey that a public hearing be set in this matter for 7:30 P.M. July 17, 1979, and that the proper public notice be placed. APIF, motion carried. I 5. The balance of the meeting was devoted to a general discussion with the Planner and the Engineer concerning the proposed amendment to the City Comprehensive Plan specifically dealing with the Transportation section. The general plan, as presented was favorable to the Planning Commission but it was suggested that the future location of T. H. 31 be run directly south from 190th Street to its junction either with Co. Rd. 70 or Co. Rd. 66. 6. Motion made and seconded to adjourn at 9:30 P.M. APPROVE'!) /) Jrl hi} WJF/kf I I I I l!)~ MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR July 17, 1979 1. The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 7:30 P.M. Present: Chairman Hanson, Members Carey, Gerten, Hoyer Absent: Member Feely Also Present: Administrator Ford 2. Motion by Hoyer, second by Carey to approve the minutes of June 19, 1979. APIF, motion carried. 3. The Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:30 P.M. to consider the request for a variance for side yard set back of from 30 ft. to 15 ft. to permit the construction of a detached garage by Dale Marinenko at 5784 Upper 183rd Street. The Chairman noted that an affadavit of published notice was in the file. It was the consensus of the members that the granting of this variance would stilt maintain an angular, clear vision zone because the garage would be located in the rear of the lot and not attached to the house. Motion by Hoyer, second by Carey that the variance be approved. APIF, motion carried. 4. The commission then took up the previously scheduled matter of the continuing revision of the city comprehensive plan. A short period of time was devoted to the review of the previous meeting dealing with transportation and the commission took note of the revision suggested by the commission and made by the planner, Charles Tooker. 5. The scheduled point of discussion for this meeting was public facilities, and more particularly, sewer. Several points were brought up during this discussion: 1) That in the Farmington Comprehensive Sewer Plan previously submitted to the Sewer Board and to the Metropolitan Council, certain population projections were made. 2) These population projections were combined with the other user communities and based on those total projections, the capacity of the new plant was designed. 3) Both lakeville and Apple Valley are now showing substantial increase in their original projections and are incurring a great deal of resistence from the Metro Sewer Board. 4) The Metro Sewer Board is taking the position that rather than to add to the new plant which will come in on line in August, those communities should reduce the rate of development. S) All of this could have the effect of the new plant being over capacity on the day it opens. 6) We should review very closely, our population projections and a. decide that they either need to be increased or decreased or b. that they are satisfactory and be prepared to defend the reserve capacity which we nON have in the new plant, Mr. Tooker was to look into that facet. 6. The commission took note that the next session dealing with the revIsIon of the comprehensive plan will be held at 7:30 P.M., August 21, 1979 and that that session will deal with parks. It was suggested that in the interim, City Planner Charles Tooker meet with both the Park and Recreation Manager and the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission. 1 f:, Ll 1..,/ t 7. The next agenda item was listed as the proposed Mobile Home Park by Mr. Wally Hilgenberg, representing 0 & H Development Company. Mr. Hilgenberg did appear and explained to the commission that he had just arrived in town and that he was not prepared to make a full presentation because his wife was in the hospital giving birth to a child and he must leave. Members of the commission expressed their understanding of the situation and agreed to defer his presentation to the next meeting. He left with the commission an architectural drawing showing the lot lines, proposed general uses and two foot contours. He indicated briefly that their proposal would consist of a request for mobile home park in the C-l area consisting of clusters at a density of 3 to 3t units per acre and in the R-l zoning district, single mobile home units at a density of 5 units per acre. It was brought out that no one at this point knew whether or not the school had any intentions of acquiring any of the land which was now included in this proposal and Mr. Hilgenberg said that before the next meeting he would determine what the schools intentions are and to what extent and in what way it affected his p roposa I . I 8. Motion made and seconded to adjourn at 10:00 P.M. R.:;ec,ullY", s~bmitte~ /1 7?/~1-~ Will i am J . Ford City Administrator APPPROVED 1> j:J..I/79 I WJF/kf I I I I 1~~ MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR AUGUST 21, 1979 1. The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 7:30 P.M. Present: Chairman Hanson, .members Carey, Feely, Gerten, Hoyer Also Present: Administrator Ford and Planner Tooker 2. Motion by Carey, second by Gerten to approve the minutes of July 17, 1979 as presented. APIF, motion carried. 3. The Administrator then informed the Planning Commission that Mr. Dick Becker and his brother had been in earlier to discuss the possible development of the property on Highway 3, on the East side. After a thorough discussion, the Admin- istrator was requested to inform the Beckers that they would be encouraged to prepare some sort of proposal which would be looked upon favorably for R-l and some R-3 zoning, but would be closely questioned if it included B-1 rezoning. 4. The Commission then took up the prepared Draft No. Three, dated August, 1979, with City Planner Charles Tooker, which was in reference to the continuing revision of the City Comprehensive Plan. This draft dealt primarily with matters of population, employment, and housing. The views presented by the Planner in this draft were accepted in concept. It was pointed out that the September meeting of the Planning Commission would then be devoted to the item of public facilities and parks. The date of that meeting being September 18, 1979. 5. Wally Hilgenberg and Jim Thompson then presented their preliminary proposal for the development of land in the area of Co. Rd. 31 and 190th Street. The proposal called for Mobile Homes in the presently zoned R-l district at a density of 5! per acre and in the presently zoned C-l district at a density of 3t per acre. It also called for single family dwellings on approximately ij5' acres west of T.H. 31. Throughout the discussion it was determined that this proposal would require re- zoning some C-l to R-l and that that could be done only by the City Council, either with or without the recommendation of the Planning Commission. After a very lengthy and detailed discussion of the merits of the preliminary proposal, the following action was taken. Motion by Hoyer, second by Carey that the Planning Commission recommend to the council that they not rezone the C-l zoning district to R-l in furtherance of this proposal. APIF, motion carried. 6. Motion by Feely, second by Gerten that it is the consensus of the Planning Commission that the developer not be encouraged to pursue this plan in anticipation of the granting of a special exception in the R-l East of Co. Rd. 31, for a Mobile Home for the following reasons: a) City Code (Z-4-4(d), the special exception would not produce a total visual impression and environment which is consistent with the environment of the ne i ghborhood. b) City Code (2-4-4(e), the special exception could not organize vehicular access and parking to minimize traffic congestion in the area. APIF, motion carried. 7. Mr. Robert Stegmaier appeared at the meeting to ask some general questions concerning land use. Mr. Stegmaier owns a large area of land in the general vicinity of the proposed mobile home park abutting on CO. Rd. 31. He had no specific questions and no specific proposals but questioned the commission in a general way as to possible land uses. 156 8. Mr. Marv Alexander appeared at the Planning Commission meeting to inquire about the status of the Sayers land, t mile East of Co. Rd. 31 on T.H. 50. He was specifically inquiring about whether or not the Planning Commission would I look favorably upon, first of all the location of a new Farmington School and the rezoning of the surrounding area from 1-1 to R-l which would incorporate a multiple dwelling special exception. Although no vote was taken and no specific positions were assumed by individual members, there seemed to be a general consensus that that area was neither appropriate for the location of a school, nor for residential development and that the original zoning of Light Industrial (1-1) was still valid. Mr. Alexander left the commission with the impression that he tended to agree with them or at least did not actively oppose their original position. 9. The Administrator presented to the commission a request from Francis Ingerson, 400 Elm Street, to add approximately 100 sq. ft. to an existing residential struct- ure which is located in a B-2, commercial zone, as a continuing non-conforming use. It was a finding of fact by the commission that the proposed construction did not substantially expand or alter the non-conforming use and therefore, should be permitted. 10. It was noted that the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission would be September 18, 1979 at 7:30 P.M., at which time the subject of parks would be dis- cussed in the continuing revision of the comprehensive plan. 11. Motion made and seconded to adjourn at 10:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, ~~.~~$;df Wi II iam J. For'" City Administrator I APPROVED q l;g/79 WJF/kf I I I I 1 S7, MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR SEPTEMBER 18, 1979 1. The Meeting was called to order by Chairman Hanson at 7;30 P.M. Present: Chairman Hanson, Members Feely, Gerten and Hoyer Absent: Member Carey Also Present: City Planner Charles Tooker and Recreation Manager Jim Bell 2. Motion by Gerten, second by Feely that the minutes of August 21, 1979 be approved as presented. APIF, motion carried. 3. The commission considered a matter which had been referred to them by the Zoning Officer for interpretation of the zoning ordinance. Mr. Marvin Wier proposed to convert the existing theater at 314 Oak Street and install a business which consists of the following: 1) Sale of outboard motors 2) Sale of lawn mowers 3) Sale of Chainsaws 4) Sale of Snowmobiles 5) Purchase and sale of used boats, trailers and similar equipment 6) Repair and sale of bicycles 7) Sale of parts to maintain items sold 8) Repair of items sold The property is located in the B-2, Downtown Retail Business zoning district. It was pointed out that this same business was operated within a t block distance of this location approximately 3t years ago. The commission established in discussing with Mr. Wier, that the sale of boats with outside storage, would be minimal, and he assured them that the noise should be of no major problem. Motion by Hoyer, second by Gerten that the proposed land use is found to be consistent with the zoning. APIF, motion carried. 4. Mr. Vern Johnson had submitted a request for a special exception for a home occupation at 621 Oak Street. The commission took no action in this matter because they preferred to obtain some additional information from Mr. Johnson. He was to be notified of this request. 5. The balance of the meeting was devoted to the discussion with City Planner Charles Tooker and Recreation Manager Jim Bell concerning the revision of the City Comprehensive Plan and specifically the open space and ~rkand Recreation portion of that plan. They discussed in detail the preliminary proposals presented jointly by the Planner and Recreation Manager, dated August 24, 1979. Also, specific acquisitions discussed were: 1) Two areas adjoining Rambling River 2) A wooded area in the area of Co. Rd 31 and 190th-195th Street. 3) The gravel pit area on 195th Street. 4) Trail system The Planning Commission agreed, in concept, with the tentative proposal set forth in the workup presented. At the next regular meeting October 16, 1979, the Commission will address itself to the section dealing with capital improvements in the Comprehensive Plan. Motion made and seconded to adjourn at 9:25 P.M. Resgectfully submAt~e~ /W~/}.~ Wi II i am J. Ford City Administrator WJF/kf APPROVED /0/;0/7Q I I I 1 t)9 AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR OCTOBER 16, 1979 1. The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 7:30 P.M. Present: Chairman Hanson, Members Carey, Gerten and Hoyer Absent: Member Feely 2. Motion by Hoyer, second by Carey to approve the minutes of September 18, 1979. APIF, motion carried. 3. The commission made note that originally Mr. Charles Tooker, City Planner, was to discuss a phase of the City Comprehensive Plan revision dealing with capital improvements but that he had requested this presentation be deferred to the next meeting because he was unable to attend this meeting. 4. The Commission then considered the request of Mr. Vernon Johnson for a home occupation special exception at 621 Oak Street. This request had been deferred from the previous meeting for lack of specific information. The commission set a publ ic hearing in this matter for 7:30 P.M., November 20, 1979. 5. The Commission considered the request of Mr. James Reisinger of a change to his original special exception granted August 10, 1976, at 20522 Akin Road. The original special exception provided for the construction of a building under a non-commercial equipment maintenance and storage special exception in the C-l zoning district. He now proposed to build an additional building of approximately the same size as the original building and on the same parcel of land. It was the consensus of the commission that this requested change was substantial enough to warrant a public hearing. Motion by Gerten, second by Carey that a public hearing be set in the matter for 7:45 P.M., November 20, 1979. APIF, motion carried. 6. Motion made and seconded to adjourn at 8:50 P.M. Re~spectfU,J.lY submi tte~: ,,/--1;jl ./"/..};. . .,': ~; ....;. ,,,...,,,V,/' r,;.~', ".", ,.,' _"/~ ~ . ,-......c;...- :,.. ".-"., ,., ,'. Wi II iam J. Ford f' City Administrator APPROVED 7I('~; d. 0, /977' WJF/kf I I I 1~1 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR NOVEMBER 20, 1979 1. The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 7:30 P.M. Present: Chairman Hanson, Members Carey, Gerten, Hoyer Absent: Member Feely Also Present: Administrator Ford 2. Motion by Gerten, second by Carey to approve the minutes of October 16, 1979. APIF, motion carried. 3. The Chairman opened the public hearing, notification of which had earlier been published concerning the request of Vernon Johnson for a home occupation at 621 Oak Street, which would allow him to conduct real estate activity from that address. There were approximately eleven people in the audience, most of whom spoke in varying degrees in opposition of granting of the home occupation. A general discussion took place in which members of the audience, Mr. Vernon Johnson, and members of the commission took part. The public portion of the meeting was then closed and the matter was discussed among members of the commission, particularly touching on specific points of objections and questions raised by the audience. The members of the commission appeared to be in agreement that the application for a home occupation met the requirements for that special exception as spelled out in Title 10, Chapter 10, Section 8, of the City Code. Motion by Hoyer, second by Carey that the home occupation be granted. APIF, motion carried. 4. The Chairman then opened the public hearing, notice of which had earlier been published in regard to the request of James Reisinger to substantially modify an existing special exception at 20251 Akin Road West. The existing special exception numbered 23A, granted on August 10, 1976, was to permit a non-commercial Equipment Maintenance and Storage land use at that address. Motion by Gerten, second by Carey that the special exception be modified in the following particulars: a) That the special exception now apply to the total parcel b) That the plantings originally required on the North side now be required to be planted within one year and to be 150 feet in length in accordance with the attached drawing. c) That a building identical to the present building be permitted to be con- structed except that the new building will measure 50 x 80 feet. d) That a chain link fence be constructed 7 feet in height, as shown on the attached drawing. e) That the plantings be installed as shown on the attached drawing. f) That the applicant draw in on the attached drawing, two driveways, the width of each not to exceed 40 feet and a minimum distance between the two of 40 feet and that access otherwise be controlled. g) That this special exception does not include any type of exterior sign because request for such is not being made at this time. APIF, motion carried. 5. The commission then heard Mr. Dwight Tange, 908 9th Street, who explained that although he was President of the Townsedge Townhouse Association, located adjacent to the Shopping Center, he was not here in any official capacity for that association or the Board that represents it. He was appearing as any individual to seek informa- tion concerning our zoning ordinances. He explained that he had acquired a copy of ]62 the plat showing the lot lines drawn as a result of the replatting between I the townhouse property and the shopping center. He inquired as to the possibility of obtaining a zero-lot set back on the West property line for the construction , of garages in conjunction with the Townhouses. There was no firm expression of opinion by the commission at this time and none was sought, however there appeared to be a consensus that his request would have merit if he or representatives of his association chose to pursue it. 6. Motion made and seconded to adjourn at 9:45 P.M. Respectfu"IIY sUbmitt~ed' I ~/~.::..~,;..~~~.,. t' !-~-" .' ~,.",_..:;....G.-l..............- .......7, William J. For~' City Administrator APPROVED /.~j;c~ II/( WJF/kf I I I I I 1~~ MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR DECEMBER 18, 1979 1. The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 7:30 P.M. Present: Chairman Hanson, Members Carey, Feely, Hoyer Absent: Member Gerten Also Present: Administrator Ford, Planner Charles Tooker 2. Motion by Carey, second by Hoyer to approve the minutes of November 20, 1979. APIF, motion carried. 3. Mr. Steven Olson presented to the commission, his request for the commissions consideration for a special exception to allow a home occupation consisting of a plastic injection molding operation in his residential garage located at 5754 Upper 183rd Street. Correspondence submitted to the commission by Mr. Olson was read and discussed at length with Mr. Olson, his representative and Mr. Don Johnson who was in the audience. Mmebers of the commission went in to great detail as to the specifics of his intended operation which consisted primarily of processing plastics into small plastic parts from 50 Ib bags of pellets using a 200 ton, 181 x 51, 200 amp machine. There was a consensus on the commission that Mr. Olson was sincere, ambitious and knowledgeable and there appeared to be a great desire on the part of the members to assist him, nevertheless they did explain to him that in their honest opinion, what he proposed was ipapprop~Jateina.residential zone. The City Administrator was asked to contact the IndJstrial Commission on his behalf and each member of the commission individually pledged that they would check around to see if more suitable space, at a reasonable cost could be obtained for him. Motion by Hoyer, second by Feely that the request for a special exception for a home occupation be denied on the grounds that the proposed activity did not meet the eligibility under the ordinance and in fact, was incompatible with the residential neighborhood. APIF, motion carried. 4. The commission then met with City Planner, Charles Tooker, on the continuing task of revising the City Comprehensive Plan, and more specifically, the final section dealing with a long range capital improvement program and financing plan. The lengthy and complicated discussion that followed produced the following facts: 1) The official city policy concerning future growth is at present, unknown or at least ambiguous. 2) A long range capital improvement plan would necessarily have to be based on a specific growth rate and the value contained therein, predicated upon that rate. 3) It is estimated that it would require approximately 200 man hours to develop the plan 4) To save time and manpower, the intended growth rate, should first be estab- lished prior to proceeding with the development of the plan. 5) The growth rate for Farmington in the past has been: 1 year - 3.2%; 5 year - 2.8%; 10 year - 3.9%. 6) The maximum, practical, reasonable growth rate should probably not exceed 15% per year. 7) Any projected growth rate which is substantially greater than the rate shown in the Metro System Statement, which in turn is based on past performance, will encounter stiff opposition by the Metropolitan Council. 8) If an accelerated growth rate is opted by the council, a specific set of development incentives should be selected from a broad list of alternatives submitted by the staff. 16 9) The Planning Commission should recommend a reasonable rate of growth I' to the council and request a joint meeting of the two bodies to discuss the matter. The following recommendation was then made to the council: That an 8% per annum population growth rate be targeted for the City of Farmington, that the long range development plan contained in the City Comprehensive Plan be structured around that anticipated growth rate, that a set of incentives be adopted which would tend to implement the attainment of that growth rate and that a joint meeting of the City Council and the Planning Commission be requested for 7:30 P.M. January 15, 1980, at which time only this matter would be on the agenda. 5. Motion made and seconded to adjourn at 9:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, ~~ Wi II i am J. Fo City Administrator APPROVED I WJF/kf I