Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987 119 I MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR JANUARY 20, 1987 1. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Chairman Hanson. Members Present: Angell, Gerten, Hanson, Sampson. Members Absent: Rotty. Also Present: Planner Tooker. 2. Chairman Hanson asked for comments on the minutes of the December 16, 1986 meeting. Motion by Gerten, second by Sampson to approve the minutes of December 16, 1986 as distributed. APIF, motion carried. I 3. Chairman Hanson asked Al Cruise from the engineering department of Central Telephone Company to explain what the company would like to do regarding additional equipment storage. Member Rotty arrived at 7:05 P.M. Mr. Cruise said that the electronic equipment now used in the field needs to be stored in a heated garage and the existing garage on Fourth Street will be converted to office space. Central Telephone is now evaluating which of two proposals will be utilized to replace the garage that will be converted. Member Gerten asked why the garage could not be built in the B-2, Business District. Planner Tooker said that the ordinance lists both public utility buildings and equipment and storage yards as conditional uses which will require a hearing. Chairman Hanson indicated a preference for the proposed addition to be fitted into the corner of the existing office building adjoining the area that will be converted from garage to office space. He also suggested that whenever Central Telephone decides to proceed, Mr. Cruise should contact the staff to file an application for a conditional use hearing. The Board could then act on the request. Mr. Cruise thanked the Board for this discussion and would return if Central Telephone Company decides to go ahead with the project. 4. Planner Tooker reviewed the first draft of a proposed revised Subdivision Ordinance for the City. The group had some trouble with the section on Administration and Enforcement with respect to variances. The group did review the entire ordinance for typographical errors and some second thoughts to wording of particular sections. Following their review, Planner Tooker indicated that he would look at the Variance Section again with an eye toward simplification and perhaps the Commission would be able to recommend that the ordinance should be forwarded to the City Council following the February meeting. 5. There being no further business, the Commission agreed to adjourn at 8:00 P.M. I Submitted by, {lf~L Charles Tooker Planner Approved C:</;7! %1 , 121 I MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL FEBRUARY 2, 1987 1. The meeting was called to order at 5:30 P.M. by Chairman Hanson. Members Present: Angell, Hanson, Rotty. Members Absent: Gerten, Sampson. Also Present: Planner Tooker. 2. Chairman Hanson opened the meeting by discussing a proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance which will clarify how to handle lot sizes for properties that are zoned R-l but are not included within the urban service district. The objective is to treat this land as if it were zoned agricultural so as to discourage premature platting; i.e. platting of property where sewer services are not yet available. Planner Tooker said that, while this objective is clearly presented in the City Comprehensive plan, the Zoning Ordinance requires lots of only 10,000 square feet in size without specifying that public sewer service would be required. Motion by Angell, second by Rotty to recommend that the City Council amend the City Zoning Code by requiring that property divisions of not less than one per 10 acres be added to the R-l Low Density District Requirements when public sewers are not available. APIF, motion carried. I 3. There being no further business, the Commission decided to adjourn at 5:55 P.M. Submitted by, c ILL 1:olL Charles Tooker Planner CT/mh Approved ~/7n7 I -- 123 I MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR FEBRUARY 17, 1987 1. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Chairman Hanson. Members Present: Gerten, Hanson, Rotty, Sampson. Members Absent: Angell. Also Present: Planner Tooker. 2. Chairman Hanson asked for comments on the minutes of the January 20 and February 2, 1987 meetings. Motion by Rotty, second by Hanson to approve both sets of minutes as submitted. APIF, motion carried. 3. The Commission discussed the prospect of property divisions west of Pine Knoll Subdivision in an area zoned R-1 but without any urban services. Planner Tooker indicated that a real estate agent had been promoting the sale of the land in this area and one family called to find out about improvements required by the City before land can be divided. No further requests were forwarded to the staff. I 4. Planner Tooker then reviewed with the Commission the revised draft of the proposed platting ordinance, noting some additional changes suggested by staff. Chairman Hanson said that he agreed with a suggestion offered by the City Engineer that lots on slopes exceeding 12% should be larger than minimums outlined in the City Zoning Ordinance. The Commission members agreed that this would be a positive change in the draft. There followed a discussion of the complexity in development generally. Motion by Sampson, second by Gerten to forward the draft subdivision ordinance to the City Council requesting that it be adopted following a public hearing. APIF, motion carried. 5. Member Rotty asked if the time limitation placed on the Special Exception granted to Lonnie Stark on Fairview Lane had expired. Planner Tooker indicated that he would check into it. 6. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:00 P.M. Submitted by, ~Iod~ ~ Charles Tooker Planner I CT/mh Approved 3/7/g7 125 I MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MARCH 17, 1987 1. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Chairman Hanson. Members Present: Angell, Gerten, Hanson, Sampson. Members Absent: Rotty. Also Present: Planner Tooker. 2. Chairman Hanson asked for comments on the minutes of February 2 and February 17, 1987. Motion by Hanson, second by Angell to approve the minutes of February 2, 1987 as prepared. APIF, motion carried. Motion by Sampson, second by Gerten to approve the minutes of February 17, 1987 as prepared. APIF, motion carried. I 3. Chairman Hanson opened the public hearing advertised at 7:00 P.M. on the request by Robert Alich for a conditional use to convert an existing duplex at 413 Elm Street to a rooming house with four rentable rooms. The house is owned by Mr. Alich's mother, and the primary living space will be occupied by Mr. Alich, his mother and his son. It will involve adding living space in the basement, as well as converting the upper apartment into four sleeping rooms. The Commission was concerned about off street parking for the single unit as well as the rental space. Mr. Alich in- dicated that a garage would be built for two cars and an off street parking area would be created for four cars. Commissioner Angell said that he would like to see a site plan that shows the relationship between the house and the proposed garage and parking lot. Mr. Alich was asked if he was aware that the parking lot would need to be paved. He said that he hoped to delay paving until the lot settled and the Commission agreed that this would be a possibility. They instructed Mr. Alich to have a site plan prepared which will include a planting plan that can buffer the parking lot from adjoining residential use. Motion by Sampson, second by Angell to close the public hearing. APIF, motion carried. They agreed to meet in special session if necessary to review whatever plans Mr. Alich cared to provide before taking action on this request. I 4. Chairman Hanson then opened the public hearing advertised for 7:20 P.M. on the request by Timothy and Mary MacEnany of 909 10th Street for a variance to section 10-4-1(G) of the City Code which requires uniform front yard setbacks. The MacEnanys have a basement water problem which they plan to solve by filling. Replacement space will be created on the first floor, and, to get the architectural style they envision, the addition will extend beyond the front yard setback of all houses along the street by ten feet. Planner Tooker indicated that the variety offered by staggered setbacks could be pleasing in residential neighborhoods. But, the ordinance does not provide for any flexibility with regard to front yard setbacks. The Commission members discussed alternative floor plans that would not require a variance. The MacEnanys suggested that the ordinance should be amended and the Commission agreed that this could be a possibility. Motion by Sampson, second by Gerten to close the public hearing. APIF, motion carried. Motion by Angell, second by Gerten to deny the request for variance since paragraphs 2 and 3 of Section 10-8-6 (C) have not been met and that unnecessary hardship has not been 126 demonstrated. APIF, motion carried. The Commission asked the staff to review other ordinances for some possible wording that would introduce enough flexibility to change front yard setbacks in developed neighborhoods. I 5. The Commission then looked at a request from Bob and Jane Klocker to divide a relatively small parcel on Highway 50 in Section 35 west of downtown. The land is zoned A-I Agricultural and the forty acre parcel in question already has four dwelling units. The Commission explained that the density standards developed for the ordinance are suitable and do prevent premature conversion of agricultural land. It was the consensus of those present that hardship would not be demonstrated and that a public hearing should not be scheduled. 6. Chairman Hanson asked Lyle Schmidtke to outline his question for Planning Commission. Planner Tooker reviewed a variance request for sign which would overhang the right of way of Elm Street by 2~ feet. Commission was, in general, sympathetic to the questions raised by Mr. Schmidtke, and suggested that a public hearing should be set. the a The 7. Planner Tooker outlined the proposed replat of a portion of the Fair Hills Addition. The purpose of the plat is to change part of one block from duplex and multiple family structures to single family construction. This repre- sents the second time a portion of the plat has been revised, and if approved, will eliminate the potential for multiple dwellings to be built within the Fair Hills subdivision. Several comments have been received from staff, but the most significant came from Engineer Kaldunski. He has suggested that the confusing, and ultimately dangerous, intersection created by Euclid Path, Eureka Avenue and 195th Street West can be corrected by making Eureka Avenue directly link with 195th Street; and Euclid Path to intersect with Eureka Avenue at a right angle. This change will not change the number of lots which increases from 10 lots in the existing plat to eighteen lots in the proposed plat. Planner Tooker indicated that Dakota County will require controlled access along County Road 64 and that the Soil and Water Conser- vation District has requested that the developer submit an erosion and sedi- ment control plan. Motion by Angell, second by Gerten to recommend approval of Fair Hills Fourth Addition to the City Council subject to: a. Controlled access of 195th Street West indicated on the final plat. b. Submission of an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan by the developer. c. Conformance with recommendations of the City Engineer as outlined in his memorandum of March 5, 1987. APIF, motion carried. I 8. Motion by Gerten, second by Sampson to recommend rezoning of Fair Hills Fourth Addition plus lots 4 and 5 of Block 3 of the Original Plat from R-3 to R-l Low Density District. APIF, motion carried. 9. The Commission adjourned at 8:35 P.M. Submitted by, 0JuMI~ ~ I Charles Tooker Planner Approved ~/~I /81 I I I 127 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR APRIL 21, 1987 1. Chairman Hanson called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Angell, Gerten, Hanson, Ratty, Sampson. Members Absent: None. Also Present: Planner Tooker, Administrator Thompson. 2. The Chairman asked for comments on the minutes of March 17, 1987. Motion by Angell, second by Gerten to approve the minutes of March 17, 1987 as distributed. APIF, motion carried. 3. Chairman Hanson opened the public hearing advertised for 7:00 P.M. requested by Christian Life Church to discuss a variance which would allow a lighted sign in the Agricultural District. Planner Tooker indicated that, while the church has attributed several accidents on Highway 50 to the lack of proper identification of the building, there does not appear to be any undue hardship which justifies granting a variance. Clyde Thompson, representing the church, said that the church is located far away from the right of way of Highway 50 and people do not notice the building. A sign will help and a lighted sign will identify the building for people at night. He said further, that many of the meetings held at the church serve the Twin Cities Region rather than just the immediate area of Farmington and Lakeville, suggesting that there is a great need for a lighted sign. Member Gerten suggested that construction of the church has effectively changed land use from agricultural to urban which possibly could justify lighting the sign. Tooker said that, if the variance is granted, there should be a timer that would provide illumination for specified periods of time. Motion by Rotty, second by Sampson to close the public hearing. APIF, motion carried. Motion by Angell, second by Gerten to approve the requested variance to help reduce the potential for accidents along Highway 50 subject to the following: a. That the sign will not produce glare from either side. b. That shrubbery shall be planted to screen the light source. c. That a timing device be installed which will regulate illumination between dusk and midnight. d. That the sign is permanent, without any opportunity to introduce changeable messages. APIF, motion carried. 4. Chairman Hanson opened the public hearing advertised for 7:15 P.M. requested by Lyle Schmidtke for a variance to place a sign in the B-2 District which will overhang the right of way of Elm Street by 30 inches. Planner Tooker said that in this case a hardship does not exist, but the strict enforcement of the ordinance would be unreasonable since the existing sign mount and wiring would only need to be moved 15 inches to bring the proposed sign into conformance. Motion by Sampson, second by Angell to close the public hearing. APIF, motion carried. Motion by Rotty, second by Angell to approve a 15" variance for the service station located on portions of Lots 11 and 12, Block 26, Original Town of Farmington, since the existing wiring and standard would not be useable if the current Sign Ordinance were to be enforced. APIF, motion carried. 5. Planner Tooker reviewed the staff memorandum on Front Yard Setbacks in developed neighborhoods and focused on Section 10-4-1(G) which can be interpreted to mean that houses built further back on lots than the required 20 feet could 128 establish a mandatory setback for an entire block if they happened to be built first. The Commission agreed that the ordinance needs some clarification that would address both existing and new residential neighborhoods. The Chairman asked the Planner to bring some revised wording to the next regular meeting of the Commission. I 6. Planner Tooker then reviewed the site plan submitted by the FAA for a revised entrance to the Air Route Traffic Control Center. He said that it has been referred to the Planning Commission by the Zoning Administrator because of changes requested of the developer of the Whispering River PUD in the access to Spruce Street. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that the plan should be forwarded to the City Council with two suggestions. The first would be to require a stop sign at the driveway entrance to Spruce Street in addition to whatever signage is involved with the guard house. And, the second would involve the addition of shrubbery or a solid fence between the 18 stall parking area and Division Street to protect adjoining residential property across Division Street from headlight glare. 7. City Administrator Thompson then reviewed his memorandum regarding the in- validation of the Special Exception granted to AVID, Inc. for a beefpacking plant west of CSAH 31 on TH50. Chairman Hanson asked if the invalidation pro- cedure outlined in the new ordinance would be satisfactory since the Special Exception was granted under terms of the former ordinance. Administrator Thompson said that he would confer with the City Attorney on this but let it be known that he would like the action to be taken under terms of the new ordinance. Motion by Angell, second by Sampson to declare the Special Exception granted to AVID, Inc. to build a beefpacking plant on Highway 50 west of downtown Farmington I null and void since substantial progress has not been made to implement its purpose. APIF, motion carried. 8. Member Angell was excused at 8:00 P.M. 9. Planner Tooker then introduced a discussion of the Preliminary Plat of Farmington Hills which the new owner is planning to rename Akin Estates prior to the public hearing soon to be scheduled by the City Council. He described some of the concerns of staff including a need to develop the subdivision in two phases if public funding is going to be requested for plat improvements. He also questioned an unidentified outlot which appeared to be included within the plat and a need for the City Engineer to review the engineering drawings prior to their consideration by City Council. He also suggested that the developer is seeking to have the preliminary and final plats approved at the same time. Frank Reese, representing the owners, Jon and Arlene Malinski, said that they plan to develop the entire plat at once to take advantage of economics of scale and that the unidentified outlot will no longer be shown as part of the plat. City Administrator Thompson was asked about potential delays that could be attributed to the 429 funding mechanism. He indicated that there will be some potential for delay as the City attempts to package several developments within a single bond issue, but that County review is likely to slow the process more than anything the City might require from the developer. Robert Stegmaier, owner of property immediately to the north, asked about storm water drainage from the plat. He suggested that existing ditches might not be adequate to handle the increased runoff generated by developed property. Motion by Gerten, second by Rotty I to approve the preliminary plat of Farmington Hills/Akin Estates subject to the following: a. A signed statement by the preparer, that the final plat is identical to the preliminary plat approved by the City Council. I I I 129 b. Review by the City Engineer to assure that the revised plat conforms to his earlier recommendations. c. A lump sum payment of $8,504.84 in lieu of a park dedication and a per lot fee for storm water management due as each lot is sold, totaling $120,886.62. d. Identification or removal of an outlot adjoining County 31 near the north boundary of the plat. e. A two phase, 50% development per phase of the plat if 429 financing is used to implement the plat. And to recommend that a public hearing be scheduled during the second City Council meeting in May, 1987. APIF, motion carried. 10. Planner Tooker reviewed the Robert Alich Conditional Use Request. The land surveyor has been slow to respond to Mr. Alich and therefore no site plan has been prepared. The Commission will be given a copy of the site plan as soon as it becomes available. 11. Planner Tooker indicated that Jack Benedict is looking forward to developing Dakota County Estates Fourth Addition and would like a special meeting in May in order for the City Council to schedule a Public Hearing on the plat for the meeting on June 1, 1987. The consensus of the Commission was that a special meeting would be possible and possibly could be arranged to eliminate the regular June meeting. 12. There being no further business, the Commission decided to adjourn at 8:30 P.M. Submitted by, ~~ ~ I~ 5/1~/%1 Charles Tooker Planner Approved CT/mh I I I 131 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MAY 12, 1987 1. Chairman Hanson called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Hanson, Rotty, Sampson. Members Absent: Angell, Gerten. Also Present: Planner Tooker. 2. Chairman Hanson asked for comments on the minutes of April 21, 1987. Motion by Rotty, second by Sampson to approve the minutes of April 21, 1987 as distributed. APIF, motion carried. 3. Chairman Hanson asked for a staff presentation of Dakota County Estates Fourth Addition. Planner Tooker reviewed the agenda report and explained the relationship of this plat to the PUD approved in February, 1986. The developer has elected to remove three single family lots in the center of the plat to produce larger more saleable lots. The plat will be comprised of 44 single family dwellings and 5 quad structures for a total of 64 units. Mr. Benedict has indicated that since there is no demonstrated demand for quad homes in Farmington, he later may be free to replat the quad home sites into single family lots. The developer is anxious to proceed with the plat because the supply of lots is so short in earlier phases of this neighborhood. The response to the staff mailing on this plat came from the Fire Chief and the Soil and Water Conservation District. The Chief is interested in looking at the location of hydrants and the Soil and Water Conservation District are concerned about sediment control during construction. The City Engineer has also indicated an interest in looking at the hydrant and gate valve plan. Mr. Benedict said that the information would be available on Tuesday. Motion by Rotty, second by Sampson to forward the plat of Dakota County Estates Fourth Addition to the City Council with a recommendation that it be approved subject to: a) favorable comments from the City Engineer regarding the engineering; b) reaction from the Fire Chief concerning hydrant location; c) approval of erosion and sediment control measures by the City Engineer. APIF, motion carried. 4. The Commission again discussed the request of Robert Alich to convert 413 Elm Street from a duplex to a single family dwelling with four sleeping rooms for rent. Commission members previously had closed the public hearing but delayed any action until Mr. Alich could produce a site plan indicating the location of off street parking. Mr. Tooker said that the plan produced for Mr. Alich needs to be revised to show the proper building setbacks and location of screening for the parking lot. Commission member Rotty said that he is not in favor of granting the application since it is possible that others will follow where there are large under utilized houses. Motion by Sampson, second by Hanson to approve the requested rooming house at 413 Elm Street subject to: a. construction of a paved parking lot measuring approximately 40' x 36'. b. construction of a garage which observes the 6' setback requirements of the ordinance. c. landscaping on the west side of the parking area to screen parked automobiles. Voting for: Hanson, Sampson. Against: Rotty. Motion carried. 132 5. Planner Tooker introduced the discussion of a proposed change in the City Comprehensive Plan that would shift the major east/west collector on 190th I Street to 195th Street because of the topography east of Akin Road. The dis- cussion which followed indicated that the Commission would now formalize a decision that had been made while discussing the plats introduced by William Scarborough and Robert Stegmaier. Motion by Rotty, second by Smapson to forward a recommendation to City Council that the long range proposal for a major east/west collector street should be shifted southward from 190th Street to 195th Street. APIF, motion carried. 6. Planner Tooker called attention to a letter directed to Donald Tietz regarding the yard fence that he has built in the City right of way. He is interested in a possible variance being granted. The consensus of those present suggested that a hearing would not serve a useful purpose since one fence is in the street and the other would be difficult to prove a hardship for. 7. Chairman Hanson then said that since two members were absent, the discussion on a possible change for front yard setbacks in residential districts should be delayed to the next regular meeting. Those present agreed. 8. Chairman Hanson asked if the Commission would mind forgoing the regular May meeting since all of the pending business had been handled during this special session. It was the consensus of those present to hold the next meeting at the regular time, June 16, 1987. 9. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:45 P.M. I Submitted by, ~~ lq Charles Tooker Planner Approved &/1&/9'1 I I I I 133 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR JUNE 16, 1987 1. Chairman Hanson called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Gerten, Hanson, Rotty and Sampson. Members Absent: Angell. Also Present: Planner Tooker. 2. Chairman Hanson asked for comments on the minutes of May 12, 1987. Motion by Rotty, second by Sampson to approve the minutes of May 12, 1987 as submitted. APIF, motion carried. 3. Chairman Hanson suggested that since the original applicant appears not to be pressing for a change and that Member Angell will not be at the meeting, the agenda item concerning variable setbacks should be deferred until the next regular meeting. Other members approved. 4. Planner Tooker presented the HRA request to rezone lots 1-3, the east 40' of 4 and Lots 10-13, Block 17, Original Town of Farmington from B-3 and R-2 to B-2. The petition for rezoning was submitted after representatives from Hardee's Restaurant and Dominium Corporation both indicated an interest in purchasing the cleared land at Elm Street and the railroad right of way. The intention is to develop a fast food restaurant to front on Highway 50 and a 37 unit apartment building which has access from Oak Street. The apartment building will have the same floor plan as Red Oak Manor and will require some additional land which is currently controlled by the railroad in order to provide enough off street parking. Dominium Corporation has also asked to have the alley separating the two uses vacated, and fencing installed to minimize the impact of automobile headlights from the restaurant parking lot on the residential property. The proposal for housing also suggests that the existing unimproved street also could be eliminated. The City staff is of the opinion that both the alley and the street are important for traffic circulation and servicing the two uses. The HRA would need to acquire enough right of way to accommodate off street parking and through traffic east of the building. A one way system might be possible if it becomes difficult to acquire enough land for two-way traffic. Hardee's will have enough off-street parking space to handle the needs of the restaurant but will need to install fencing and landscaping to screen the parking lot from adjoining residential use. The City staff believes that both proposals are consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan although an amendment will be required. This is because the 1987 plan revised the 1971 plan to minimize the number of non-conforming structures centered on Oak Street. B-2 zoning will allow Hardee's as a permitted use and the apartment building as a conditional use. This means that only the Dominium Proposal would be further reviewed by the Planning Commission. Motion by Rotty, second by Gerten to forward a recommendation to the City Council to amend both the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance changing Lots 1-3, the east 40' of 4, and Lots 10-13, Block 17, Original Town of Farmington to Commercial and B-2 General Business respectively subject to: a. Keeping the alley and the north/south street for emergency service. b. Introducing both fencing and landscaping to separate the business use from adjoining residential units. c. Limiting access to and from the alley to service vehicles. 134 APIF, motion carried. 5. Chairman Hanson then opened the public hearing advertised for 7:15 P.M. I to discuss the conditional use requested by Marlon Bailey for an accessory apartment at 916 Third Street. Planner Tooker reviewed the request, noting that it fits all of the criteria listed in Section 10-6-3 of the City Code regarding accessory apartments. There was general discussion by the Commission which suggested the advisability of a survey to assure that the addition will fit on a 60 foot lot. Motion by Sampson, second by Gerten to approve the accessory apartment requested by Marlon Bailey at 916 Third Street subject to the condition that six foot wide side yards are maintained. APIF, motion carried. 6. Planner Tooker reviewed the request of Jack Benedict for a variance to the sign ordinance to allow construction of a second freestanding sign at his shopping center on County 31 at 183rd Street West. One sign at the north end of the center advertises the Budget Mart and the second will advertise the proposed branch of Farmington National Bank which will front on 183rd Street West. In addition to the variance required for a second freestanding sign will be another to locate within 50' of the right of way lines for County 31 and 183rd Street West. The staff is opposed to both requests since undue hardship does not appear to be a factor. Members of the Commission suggested that any of the tenants in this building could also request special consideration. Tooker said that, if the ordinance is not going to be followed, the requirements should be changed to something that will be enforced. Jack Benedict and Dick Johnson were recognized by the Chairman to outline their case for the undue hardship imposed by the ordinance and the layout of this particular subdivision. Discussion included reference to the interest of this bank in securing a separate site to I the south of 183rd Street West for a owner occupied bank once the five year lease has expired in the existing strip center. The Commission concluded that the applicants needed time to evaluate various options, but that the Planner could set a public hearing for the regular meeting in July if they wished to follow up on this request. Mr. Johnson did indicate a willingness to locate the sign within the building setback area if a second one were to be approved. 7. It was the consensus of the members present to adjourn at 8:20 P.M. Submitted by, ~~ C1tIL Charles Tooker Planner Approved 117-\ I ~1 I I I I 135 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR JULY 21, 1987 1. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Chairman Hanson. Members Present: Angell, Gerten, Hanson, Rotty. Members Absent: Sampson. Also Present: Planner Tooker. 2. Chairman Hanson asked for comments on the minutes of June 16, 1987. Motion by Rotty, second by Gerten to approve the minutes of June 16, 1987 as distributed. APIF, motion carried. 3. Chairman Hanson opened the public hearing advertised for 7:00 P.M. by asking for staff commentary on the request for a second area sign in the strip shopping center on County 31 by Jack Benedict. The remarks by Planner Tooker were followed by statements from owner Jack Benedict and Dick Johnson of Farmington National Bank. In Mr. Benedicts analysis, the hardship requiring two signs results from the City's requirement that a frontage road had to link Dakota County Estates with Dakota County Estates Third Addition. This produced an "L" shaped strip center in which the rear portion has little visibility from the main road. Chairman Hanson asked about the availability of space on the Budget Mart sign in which the bank could be identified. Mr. Johnson indicated that the bank had no interest in sharing a sign standard with anyone. Mr. Benedict was asked if he did not control the signs in the Center and if he had checked the limitation placed on signs before starting to rent space in the building. Member Rotty indicated that he had visited shopping centers in Burnsville of various shapes and concluded that all limited area signs to one per center. Member Angell said that his experience with shopping centers has little to do with signs. If he needs something, he investigates the center to see if it possibly is available. For this reason, he believes that a hardship does not exist. Motion by Gerten, second by Rotty to close the public hearing. APIF, motion carried. Motion by Angell, second by Gerten to deny the requested variance for a second sign at the shopping center on Pilot Knob Road at 183rd Street since the applicant had failed to prove that a hardship exists. APIF, motion carried. 4. The Commission then turned to a number of wording changes proposed for the Farmington Zoning Ordinance based upon concerns raised by the City Administrator as follows: a. Motion by Rotty, second by Angell to amend section 10-4-1(L) by changing the phrase "In the R-l Residential District" to read: In all Residential Districts. APIF, motion carried. Motion by Angell, second by Hanson to amend 10-3-2(H) by moving hotels and motels from the permitted use column to the conditional use column. APIF, motion carried. b. c. Motion by Rotty, second by Gerten to amend section 10-4-1 by adding (P) as follows: (P) A vehicular access plan shall be required which links every site with an improved public street or alley before any building permit is issued. APIF, motion carried. 136 d. Motion by Gerten, second by Rotty to amend section 10-6-2 "Water Recreation and Water Storage" by substituting 10-6-2: Residential Swimming Pools as I follows: 10-6-2: Residential Swimming Pools: Any enclosure, in ground and above ground, having a water surface area exceeding one hundred (100) square feet and a water depth greater than one and one-half feet (1~') shall be considered a swimming pool which must meet the following location restrictions: A. General 1. Pools shall not be located within ten feet (10') (measured horizontally) from underground or overhead utility lines of all types. 2. Pools shall not be located within any private or public utility, drainage, walkway or other easement. 3. Pool lighting shall be directed toward the pool and not toward adjacent property. 4. Pool area shall be enclosed by a non-climable type safety fence at least four feet (4') in height to prevent uncontrolled access to the pool area. The fence shall have a self-closing and self-latching gate. B. Single Family Residential 1. Pools shall not be located within any required front, side and rear yard setback and shall be at least six feet (6') from any principal structure or frost footing. 2. In addition to observing yard setback requirements of each district, the filter unit, pump, heating unit and any other noise producing mechanical equipment shall be located at least twenty-five feet (25') from any residential structure on adjacent property. C. Multiple Family Residential 1. Water surfaces and pumps, filter or other apparatus used in connection with the pool shall not be located closer than fifty feet (50') to any lot line. 2. Landscaping as outlined in Section 10-6-14 of this code shall be placed between the pool area and adjoining low density district lot lines. 3. Deck areas, adjoining patios or other areas used in conjunction with the pool, shall be located at least fifteen feet (15') from any lot line in an adjoining low density district. APIF, motion carried. I e. Motion by Rotty, second by Angell to amend Chapter 4 Zoning Board of Adjust- ment - by the repeal of Sections 2-4-3 through 2-4-8 which were encorporated into the Zoning Ordinance by the comprehensive amendment of March 17, 1986. I APIF, motion carried. I I I f. Motion by Angell, second by Gerten to make no changes in the current setback requirements for front yards. There appears to be little need for the type of changes that staff has developed. APIF, motion carried. 5. There being no further business, the Commission agreed to adjourn at 8:30 P.M. Submitted by, ~~~ 'CS Charles Tooker Planner ~/I8'/g7 Approved 137 I I I 139 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR AUGUST 18, 1987 1. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Chairman Hanson. Members Present: Angell, Gerten, Hanson, Rotty. Members Absent: Sampson. Also Present: Planner Tooker. 2. Chairman Hanson asked for discussion of the minutes of July 21, 1987. Motion by Rotty, second by Gerten to approve the minutes of July 21,1987 as distributed. APIF, motion carried. 3. Chairman Hanson opened the public hearing advertised for 7:00 P.M. requested by Donald Tietz, 5370 182nd Street West, for a variance to build a fence six feet high in his front yard. Planner Tooker said that the request is based on the premise that a four foot fence denies this owner use of property that others in this same district enjoy. In essence, the owner will lose the right of privacy for a substantial portion of this lot if a four foot fence is required. Mr. Tietz said that his fence was built over a long period of time. When he began, there was no limitation on the height of fences. The fences along the rear property lines were built before six foot high fences were not allowed in front yards. After completing the front yard fences, he was told that the Zoning Ordinance had been changed and now limits front yard fences to 4 feet in height. He was ordered to remove one section of his fence from the public right of way and to reduce the front yard fence to four feet in height. The fence was moved off the public right of way, but not reduced in height as Mr. Tietz intended to ask for a variance. In the meantime, a "ticket" was issued and a court appearance ordered. The variance request came in before the court proceeding and the judge is waiting for a response from the Planning Commission. Tooker said that from personal experience with a similar lot, the variance appeared to be a good idea. Upon discussion, there was limited support for the hardship. There appears to be too many similar circum- stances in the City to grant the variance. Motion by Gerten, second by Rotty to close the public hearing. APIF, motion carried. Motion by Angell, second by Gerten to deny the request since the test for a variance listed in Section 10-8-6(C) has not been met with respect to Item #4, which reads: "The variance observes the spirit and intent of this Title, produces substantial justice and is not contrary to the public interest." Voting in favor: Angell, Gerten, Hanson. Opposed: Rotty. Motion carried. Mr. Tietz then said that there are a number of other fences in the neighborhood which are six feet in height built in front yards. He would expect that these also will be removed. Mr. Hanson said that any fences turned in for non-compliance would undergo a review by the City staff. 4. Chairman Hanson then opened two public hearings advertised for 7:15 P.M. and continued the Stiles variance request until the conclusion of the Sauber Conditional Use hearing. Planner Tooker outlined the request of Jack Sauber to add a retail outlet and personal service (barber and beauty shop) establishment to his existing plumbing shop at 100 Third Street. The major problems as outlined by Tooker were as follows: a. The design study for downtown Farmington was initiated to attract investors into the four block area where there are at the present time a number of vacancies. 140 b. The site at 100 Third Street is two blocks from the downto and separated from it by Haugen-Brown Ford automobile agency. The site is in the middle of the B-3 Heavy Business District which has an orientation toward wholesaling, warehousing and light industry with retail business as a Conditional Use. Personal services are not included as a conditonal use WhiC~ would require an amendment of wording or district boundaries to the City Zoning Ordinance. e. There is not adequate parking off street to accommodate all of the uses requested in this application at this site. c. I d. f. The mixture of uses at this location would tend to scatter dissimilar uses over a broad area, thereby weakening the cu efforts of the HRA to promote downtown development. Mr. Sauber made a presentation suggesting that downtown currently does not offer a good alternative. He is convinced the plumbing shop alread is a retail outlet among several others in this district and that the uses he proposes will be compatible with them. Chairman Hanson suggested that since the HRA is currently involved in several potential business projects in and aro nd the down- town, that the Saubers should get some reaction from the HRA prior to any action by the Planning Commission. Motion by Angell, second by Gerten to continue the public hearing until September 15, 1987 at 7:00 P.M. to allow the Saubers and the City staff enough time to communicate with the HRA for a reacti n to the proposal. APIF, motion carried. 5. Chairman Hanson reopened the hearing requested by William Stiles, Jr. for a variance to place a storage building in the front yard of 104 5th Street as a place to store newspapers until they are delivered. Mr. Stil s was not present. Planner Tooker indicated that Section 10-6-5 of the Zonin Ordinance is quite specific on storage sheds. They may be placed in rear yar s in resi- dential districts behind the principal use. There appeared to be n grounds which satisfied Section 10-8-6(C) of the City Code. Motion by Rott , second by Angell to close the public hearing. APIF, motion carried. Motion y Gerten, second by Rotty to deny the request for a variance since storage sh ds are not permitted in front yards and that the storage facility could be bui t in the rear yard of 421 Main Street, an adjoining property which is also 0 ed by Mr. Stiles. APIF, motion carried. I 6. There being no further business, the members agreed to adjourn t 8:30 P.M. Submitted by, ~~ Charles Tooker )~ Planner Approved q \61~1 I I I I 141 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR SEPTEMBER 15, 1987 1. Chairman Hanson called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Angell, Hanson and Sampson. Members Absent: Gerten, Rotty. Also Present: Planner Tooker. 2. The Chairman called for comments on the minutes of August 18, 1987. Motion by Angell, second by Hanson to approve the minutes of August 18, 1987 as submitted. APIF, motion carried. 3. The Chairman then opened the hearing continued from the meeting of August 18, 1987 on the Conditional Use request submitted by Jack Sauber to expand an existing building at 100 Third Street for a barber and beauty shop plus a dress shop. The Chairman suggested that the discussion be delayed until the applicant appeared. 4. The Planner then described the response of Farmington City Council to some suggested Zoning Ordinance amendments forwarded by the Planning Commission. a. Minimum Square Footage for Accessory Storage Buildings The Council concern about the validity of an 800 square foot maximum was discussed. It was the consensus of those present that while the maximum listed in the uniform building code is 1,000 square feet, lots in Farmington are relatively small. A 1,000 square foot house and 1,000 square foot garage provides only 4,000 square feet of open space, including driveways, on lots in the R-2 and R-4 Districts. They believe it is indeed possible to erect a three stall garage within the 800 square foot limits and, if an applicant lives on a large enough lot to accommodate a larger structure, a variance could be granted. Because the 800 square foot limit actually applies only to accessory structures, the Commission decided that the original recommendation will stand. b. Access Plan to Platted Property Discussion of the proposal to require an access plan indicated that the Planning Commission is concerned only about platted, but unimproved, streets and alleys. The City should not be "backed into" improvements which are forced after a staff member, the building inspector, has issued a building permit. Those members of the Commission present would not favor handling an access matter after the permit is issued and the original recommendation will stand. 5. Chairman Hanson then recognized Dennis Perro who wished to informally request the Commission to consider a variance for a storage building in the front yard of his home at 5379 190th Street West in Farmington. Mr. Perro had installed a slab in the front yard of his home but was notified by the building inspector that such a structure was not possible. Member Sampson indicated that the Commission is bound by the tests for a variance listed in Section 10-8-6(C) of the City Code. This request appears to present an inconvenience rather than a hardship as defined by the code. Member Angell concurred and suggested that a hearing would not likely result in an approval of his request. Mr. Perro thanked the Commission and indicated that he would not initiate a formal request. 6. Chairman Hanson then returned to the request of Jack Sauber since both Mr. Sauber and his tenants were present. Planner Tooker indicated that the HRA was not going to take a position on this request since it involved a planning, rather than a 142 development, judgement. Mr. Tooker also said that the request is complicated by the fact that conditional uses in the B-3 Business district do not include personal services. In order to implement a positive reaction from the Planning I Commission, the City Council would need to: a. rezone this area from B-3 to B-2; or b. expand the conditional use section of the B-3 District to include personal services. Another problem represented by 100 Third Street is that the site is not large enough to accommodate all of the off street parking called for in the Zoning Code. The site plan presented to the Commission shows 5 off street stalls, whereas 20 would be required by the ordinance. Mr. Sauber said that downtown is not large enough to accommodate all of the business activity that will be locating in Farmington and his site would have enough parking if the City would widen the street to provide space for diagonal parking. Motion by Sampson, second by Angell to close the public hearing. APIF, motion carried. The Commission then discussed its options, including the possibility of adopting a motion to approve the conditional use request subject to action by the City Council that would either change the district boundaries or add personal services to the B-3 District. In spite of a negative reaction from staff, such a motion was introduced. It did not attract a second since Mr. Sauber said that he would withdraw the request. The prospective tenants had left the meeting after learning that a firm decision could not be made this evening. Motion by Angell, second by Sampson to deny the request based upon the fact that personal services are not part of the list of conditional uses that are permitted within the B-3 District. APIF, motion carried. 7. Chairman Hanson recognized the resident caretaker of Red Oak Manor who asked I if the Building Inspector had forwarded a drawing of the proposed storage building that the owner would like to have built on this site. Planner Tooker said that he was aware that such a request would be made but had not been given a site plan. The Chairman suggested that the caretaker submit an application for a variance which the Planner could then schedule a hearing for at the next regular meeting. 8. There being no further business, the members agreed to adjourn at 8:30 P.M. Submitted by, ~~ Charles Tooker IC(; Planner Approved 10 ]"LD 1~"1 I I I I 143 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR OCTOBER 20, 1987 1. Chairman Hanson called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Angell, Gerten, Hanson, Sampson. Members Absent: Rotty. Also Present: Planner Tooker. 2. The Ch~irman asked for comments on the minutes of September 15, 1987. Motion by Sampson, second by Angell to approve the minutes of September 15, 1987 as mailed. APIF, motion carried. 3. Chairman Hanson then opened the Public Hearing advertised for 7:00 P.M. regarding the request to build an accessory storage building at the Dairy Queen, 705 Willow Street. The hearing was continued since the applicant did not appear. 4. Chairman Hanson asked for further discussion of garage size as it might be regulated in the zoning ordinance. Planner Tooker indicated that City Council was concerned that the previous regulation forwarded by the Commission left persons with large lots to the mercy of a variance procedure which relies on hardship with respect to property. After deliberate discussion, the Commission developed the following wording as a substitute for existing section 10-4-1(L): (L) In the R-l Residential District, the total area utilized by accessory structures shall not exceed the coverage of the principal structure or one thousand (1000) square feet, whichever is less. In the R-2 and R-4 Residential Districts, the total area utilized by accessory structures shall not exceed the coverage of the principal structure or eight hundred (800) square feet, which- ever is less. by Sampson, second by Gerten to forward the preceding wording to the City as an amendment to the City Zoning Ordinance. In favor: Gerten, Sampson, Opposed: Angell. Motion carried. Motion Council Hanson. 5. Planner Tooker reviewed a request for direction from Administrator Thompson regarding a requested accessory structure at Christian Life Church, 6300 212th Street West. The Planner's interpretation of the Ordinance suggests that the accessory structure planned by the church falls into the category of Equipment and Maintenance Storage which is a listed conditional use. The applicant was notified and plans to submit an application for a public hearing during the November meeting. 6. Planner Tooker then reviewed a request from Jack Benedict to approve a change in the Dakota County Estates pun regarding employee parking for the strip center between County Road 31 and Ensley Lane. After reviewing the section of the ordinance dealing with amendments to a PUD, it was the consensus of those present that this proposed change is more than a minor change and shall include an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance approved by the City Council. 7. The Chairman reopened the public hearing for a variance requested by the Dairy Queen to build a storage building at 705 Willow Street. He suggested that several accessory storage structures have been denied by the Commission in business districts because that section of the ordinance specifically identifies residential districts as the only acceptable location. Tooker indicated that 144 business areas are likely to become cluttered with a variety of prefabricated structures since they represent the cheapest way to provide additional space. I Hanson said that, if interior space is important enough, the principal structure . should be expanded to accommodate the need. Member Angell indicated his satis- faction with the ordinance as it is presently written. Motion by Angell, second by Gerten to close the public hearing. APIF, motion carried. Motion by Angell, second by Sampson to deny the request because it does not meet the test for variances outlined in Section 10-8-6 of the City Code. APIF, motion carried. 8. Chairman Hanson then opened the hearing scheduled for 7:15 P.M. to discuss a variance and conditional use application requested by Farmington Floral to erect an off premise advertising sign at the intersection of Willow Street and Highway 3. Planner Tooker indicated that the request fits the criteria for a conditional use outlined in the sign ordinance as well as for a variance to setback requirements in the amount of 15 feet from each street right of way. He said that for reasons of upkeep, the off premise directional signs must be renewed each year, probably in January, and follow the hearing process established for the first application. Motion by Sampson, second by Angell to close the public hearing. APIF, motion carried. Motion by Hanson, second by Gerten to approve the variance and conditional use requested by Farmington Floral to erect an off- premise directional sign at Willow Street and Highway 3. APIF, motion carried. 9. Motion by Sampson, second by Gerten to adjourn at 7:30 P.M. carried. APIF, motion Submitted by, I {}Itk~~ Charles Tooker Planner Approved l\j/1/<D'1 I I . I 145 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR NOVEMBER 17, 1987 1. Chairman Hanson called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Gerten, Hanson, Rotty, Sampson Members Absent: Angell. Also Present: Planner Tooker, Administrator Thompson, Councilmember Sprute. 2. The Chairman asked for comments on the minutes of October 20, 1987. Motion by Gerten, second by Sampson to approve the minutes of October 20, 1987 as dis- tributed. APIF, motion carried. 3. Chairman Hanson opened the public hearing advertised for 7:00 P.M. to discuss the request for a conditional use permit to build a 32'x64' steel pole building to the rear of an existing gymnasium by Christian Life Church on Highway 50. The purpose of the structure is to store the existing school bus and other equip- ment used on the site. David Draus, Board Secretary, was asked if the Church were through building or if this structure would interfere with any later building plans. He responded that the existing structure is likely to be expanded but that any addition would not be in the direction of the pole structure. The staff was questioned by the Commission about the need for landscaping and paving as listed in the recommendation. Planner Tooker indicated that the parking lot is paved and the new lighted sign for the church is landscaped. The requested building therefore should be developed to similar standards. Mr. Draus asked if these improvements could be deferred until the next construction season when the Church plans to add paving for parking. Commission members responded favorably. Motion by Rotty, second by Gerten to close the public hearing. APIF, motion carried. Motion by Rotty, second by Hanson to approve the request for a 32'x64' steel pole structure to be utilized as a storage shed for Christian Life Church subject to the preparation of a landscape plan which emphasizes building screening to be approved by staff and that such a plan needs to be implemented and the access driveway paved during the 1988 building season. APIF, motion carried. Planner Tooker indicated that he would so notify the Building Inspector. 4. Chairman Hanson asked Larry Thompson to explain the City Council's concerns regarding the maximum permitted size for garages in the R-l, R-2 and R-4 districts. Mr. Thompson said that the Council is concerned about earlier comments by the Commission regarding variances for oversized garages whereas the Conditional Use process would be based on mapping documentation rather than proof of hardship. Member Angell arrived at 7:15 P.M. and indicated that the Conditional Use process is too week to provide any real control of oversized garages. He prefers the variance procedure entirely because it is based upon proof of hardship. Variances are much tougher to obtain and the process should not be made easy. He also pointed out that the City Council has the prerogative to make changes in Planning Commission recommendations if they believe strongly enough. Member Sampson said that oversized garages tend to encourage weekend mechanics and no one can appreciate how aggravating this can be until one "moves in next door". It was the consensus of the Commission to leave the last recommendation forwarded as it stands since the Planning Commission objective is to keep accessory buildings in proportion. 5. Chairman Hanson opened the public hearing advertised for 7:15 P.M. to discuss the request from Midwest Federal Savings and Loan for a variance to build an over- sized freestanding sign immediately behind the property line at 316 Oak Street. Planner Tooker indicated that the sign in question was installed after both the 146 Building Inspector and City Administrator had misread dimensions on the application form. The variance request is for 6 square feet which provides a sign of 81 square feet rather than the code maximum of 75 square feet. He pointed out that the directional sign at the rear of the property is also larger than allowed by the current ordinance and possibly could be brought into conformance with the current ordinance, as a condition of granting the requested variance. Motion by Rotty, second by Gerten to close the public hearing. APIF, motion carried. Motion by Rotty, second by Angell to grant a variance of six square feet for the freestanding sign on Oak Street on the condition that the existing directional sign at the alley is brought into conformance with the current size maximum of four square feet. APIF, motion carried. I + 6. Chairman Hanson then asked for an informal discussion of an employee parking lot added to the rear of the strip center on County #31 within Dakota County Estates PUD. Planner Tooker indicated that there are several problems with the parking lot. First, it is not included in the PUD plan and likely would not have been in its current form. Second, it has not been developed to the high standard that is evident elsewhere within the center. The lot is asphalt without benefit of curb and without enough separation between itself and other paved areas to afford reasonable landscaping. Third, it introduces another entrance onto Ensley Lane which when viewed in combination with the bank drive through and 183rd Street creates a five leg street intersection. Jack Benedict apologized for adding the lot without checking with the Commission but was under pressure to create an adequate employee parking area. When asked if the alternate scheme prepared by staff would be acceptable, Mr. Benedict said that there were many reasons why the staff plan is not workable. Chairman Hanson indicated that a major concern is whether or not the change introduced by Mr. Benedict is a major change which . requires an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance or can he classified as a minor change authorized by the Planning staff. Member Rotty indicated that he would like to see Mr. Benedict and Mr. Tooker work together on an agreeable solution that would not involve a direct access to Ensley Lane. It was the consensus of those present for the applicant and staff to work together to eliminate the access drive on Ensley Lane. It! ua.!'l tl.l!. l!.iH..!'lU..!'lM.!'l ef t!ft8.!'le J!lY!!..!'ll!.I.1! f5r eLl!. aJ!lJ!llieaI.t Il.RQ 01iaff Ji8 u8:fh e8~ileRl!Y .8 slimiMI.t!!!. eLc. au.l!.".1 .at i. [. ~u E1u~l~J b~h<C. If such a plan is developed, the Commission would be disposed to view the change as minor and not require an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance. 7. There being no further business, the members agreed to adjourn at 8:10 P.M. Submitted by, ~~ Charles Tooker let Planner A} I ~ I ~~ Approved I