HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002
.
.
.
Planning Commission
Minutes
Regular Meeting
January 8, 2002
1. Chair Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
Members Present: Rotty, Larson, Johnson, Barker
Members Absent: Privette
Also Present: Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; Lee Smick, Planning
Coordinator and Michael Schultz, Associate Planner
2. Chairman Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
3. Chairman Rotty requested comments on the November 13, 2001 Planning Commission
minutes as submitted by staff. There were none. MOTION by Barker, second by
Johnson. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
4. Chairman Rotty requested comments on the December 11, 2002 Planning Commission
minutes as submitted by staff. There were none. MOTION by Johnson, second by
Barker. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
Rotty opened all three advertised public hearings at this time.
5.
Planning Commission Chair Rotty introduced the continued public hearing for the
application to rezone property from R-2 (Medium Density) to B-3 (Heavy Business).
Associate Planner Schultz presented the staff report for the applicant, Colin Garvey, for the
property located within Block 30 of the original town of Farmington. Schultz identified
the property as the current Landscape Depot and the vacant lot located to the west. Schultz
stated that the proposed rezone is consistent with the 2020 Comprehensive Land Use Plan.
Planner Schultz stated that it is the applicant's intent is to expand the existing business.
Schultz reminded the Commission and the applicant that property adjacent to commercially
zoned property must screen it 100% and that the use of the railroad right-of-way would still
be restricted.
Chairman Rotty asked if the Rob Kirk, Manager of the Landscape Depot, had anything to
add to the staff report.
Mr. Kirk stated that they were willing to work with the Commission, staff and the residents
as much as possible to make an easy transition.
Chairman Rotty asked if there were any questions or comments from the public. There
were none. Chairman Rotty brought the discussion back to the table. Rotty stated that
some discussion did take place at the previous meeting concerning the proposed rezone.
Rotty again reminded the applicant that there would be a 100% screening requirement.
Community Development Director (CDD) Carroll asked Mr. Kirk about the existing
storage of sand and/or salt in an existing building in the back of the property. Mr. Kirk
stated that there a mixture of pulverized dirt and salt in the building now and would be
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
January 8, 2002
moved to the expansion area. CDD Carroll asked if access to the expansion area would be .
from within the existing Depot property or from 4th Street. Mr. Kirk replied that it would
be from within. CDD Carroll asked what the hours of operation would be for people
accessing the sand and salt storage. Mr. Kirk replied that it would be the same as the hours
of operation for the Landscape Depot, 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday.
MOTION by Johnson, second by Privette to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Larson, second by Johnson to forward a recommendation of
approval to the City Council to rezone the subject properties from R~2 (Medium Density)
to B-3 (Heavy Business). APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
6. Planning Chairman Rotty presented the variance for Greg Young at 1017 3rd Street.
Planning Coordinator Smick presented the staff report. Smick reported that the applicant is
seeking multiple variances for the proposed lot split of the property located at 1017 3rd
Street.
Smick stated that the applicant is seeking for proposed Parcel "A" a 12-foot variance to the
lot width (75-foot minimum), a 39.5 foot variance to the minimum front yard setback along
Third Street (50-foot front yard minimum in B~l district), a 42.5-foot setback variance to
the front yard setback along Ash Street (50-foot front yard minimum).
Smick stated that the applicant is seeking the following variances for Parcel "B"; a 18-foot
variance to the minimum lot width (75-foot minimum), a 310 square foot variance to the
minimum lot size (10,000 square foot minimum), a 17.5-foot variance to the minimum
front yard setback (50-foot minimum froil.t yard setback in B-1 district), and a .5-foot
variance to the minimum 10-foot side yard setback.
.
Smick explained that the property contains two principal structures in which the property
owner is seeking approval to split them and sell off the residential property, maintaining
the commercial property for his existing business. Smick informed the Commission that
the applicant would eventually seek a rezone for both of the properties if the variances
were approved.
Commissioner Larson asked why each parcel couldn't be split 60-feet. The applicant,
Greg Young, replied that the driveway to the (residential lot, Parcel "A") property could be
restricted with a narrow driveway (narrowing the lot from 63 feet to 60 feet) and the access
to Ash Street could be closed off with future reconstruction.
Chairman Rotty asked about the timing for the variance requests considering the adoption
of the new Zoning Code and eventual rezoning of the properties. Mr. Young replied that
there is a potential sale of the residential lot and would like to get it sold immediately.
Chairman Rotty requested any questions or comments from the public. There were none.
Chairman Rotty requested if there were any questions from the Commission.
Commissioner Larson voiced some concern for the number of variances needed to split the
property. Commissioner Barker clarified the opinion of the City Attorney in that the
.
2
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
January 8, 2002
property has legal non-conforming status and that would be difficult for the Commission to
find reason not to approve the requested variances to split the property.
Chairman Rotty agreed but pointed out the fact that the property would not be any better or
worse if the variance requests were denied and that some of the non-conforming issues
would be cleared when the Zoning Code is approved and the properties are rezoned.
MOTION by Barker, second by Johnson to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Johnson, second by Larson to approve the following variances:
"Parcel A"
1. l2-foot variance to the lot width (75-foot minimum);
11. 39.5 foot variance to the minimum front yard setback along Third Street (50-foot
front yard minimum in B-1 district);
lll. 42.5-foot setback variance to the front yard setback along Ash Street (50-foot front
yard minimum).
"Parcel B"
i. 18-foot variance to the minimum lot width (75-foot minimum);
ii. 310 square foot variance to the minimum lot size (10,000 square foot minimum);
iii. 17.5-foot variance to the minimum front yard setback (50-foot minimum front yard
setback in B-1 district);
IV. .5-foot variance to the minimum 10-foot side yard setback.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
7.
Planning Commission Chairman Rotty introduced the public hearing to Amend Title 10,
Chapters 1-10 of the Farmington City Code - Zoning Ordinance and Title 11, Chapters 1-6
of the Farmington City Code - Subdivision Ordinance. Rotty introduced Loren Gordon of
Hoisington Koegler Group, Inc.
Mr. Gordon stated that document that is being presented is the work of staff, the
Commission and the Council over the past several months. Mr. Gordon asked the
Commission how he should present the document. Chairman Rotty asked if he could
highlight the significant changes.
Mr. Gordon presented to the Commission the most significant changes to both of the
Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. Mr. Gordon proceeded to highlight changes that have
been introduced and explained the reasoning behind the proposed changes. The
Commission and the consultant went through a question and answer discussion during
various portions of the presentation to clarify proposed language.
Chairman Rotty asked if there were any questions from the public concerning the proposed
ordinance amendments. There were none. Rotty asked if there were any questions from
the Commission.
Commissioner Johnson asked about the lowering of the maximum height in some of the
zoning districts. Loren explained that in the low density zoning districts it was lowered so
that new structures would blend with existing structures, while multi-family structures in
the higher density districts would remain at 45 feet.
3
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
January 8, 2002
Chairman Rotty and the Commission commended the consultant and staff on the work put
in on the revisions to the ordinance. Rotty asked what the next step in the process was.
Planner Smick informed the Commission that both chapters would be forwarded to the
City Council at its February 19, 2002 meeting. The Zoning Map would be next to come
before the Commission.
.
Planner Schultz introduced for discussion an issue relating to the measurement of setbacks
from right-of-way easements. Schultz explained that a number of properties along the
Pilot Knob Road corridor had property purchased for the purpose of widening the right-of-
way. Schultz requested the Commission include language within their motion to allow
staff to clarify this issue with the City Attorney and include any necessary language within
the proposed ordinances before being brought to the City Council.
MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Barker, second by Johnson to forward a recommendation of
approval to the City Council to adopt Title 10, Chapters 1-10 - Zoning Ordinance and Title
11, Chapters 1-6 - Subdivision Ordinance, contingent upon the following;
1. Staff review the Flood Plain Ordinance in regard to the process of filing variances;
11. To include a second option under 10-6-12 (B) 3 to allow fences to be placed five
(5) feet off the property line when adjacent to a driveway on a neighboring lot;
lll. The City Attorney review the ordinances to include any necessary language to
include setbacks measured from right-of-way easements.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
.
8. Chairman Rotty introduced for discussion the appeal of Hometown, Inc on the decision of
Planning staff to deny the business owner's sign permit application.
Associate Planner Schultz stated that staff denied the sign permit application based on the
language in Section 4-3-1: Definitions, that wall signage may project from the wall no
more than fifteen (15) inches from all points of the sign. Also under Section 4-3-3 (B) la:
Signs in the B and I districts does not allow for more than one (1) principal sign on one (1)
building face. Schultz then outlined the history of the application and all contact made
with the appellant.
Commissioner Rotty asked Mrs. Friedrich if she had any additional comments.
Mrs. Friedrich stated that she didn't know how there couldn't be more than one cabinet
sign when a sign projected out fifteen (15) inches from a wall. The appellant stated that
she would have ordered a larger sign if this one (sign) is not permitted, but it has already
been ordered. Mrs. Friedrich added that she is just trying to get more exposure for her
business.
The Commission, staff and appellant discussed possible alternatives to erect the purchased
signs on the building. Discussion continued over possible resolutions and how it may
addressed in the sign ordinance. Commissioner Larson asked why the type of proposed
.
4
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
January 8, 2002
sign might have been excluded from the Code. Schultz stated that it might simply deal
with aesthetics.
It was the Commissions reluctant opinion that the issue involving two (2) signs on one wall
frontage was more of an issue than the interpretation of the fifteen (15) inch projection
from the wall.
MOTION by Barker, second by Larson to support City staffs fmdings in the denial of the
appellant's sign permit application. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
9. There being no further business the Commission agreed to adjourn at this time.
Respectfully submitted,
Michael Schultz
Associate Planner
~//2/0;2.
f'
Approved
5
.
.
.
Planning Commission
Minutes
Regular Meeting
February 12, 2002
1. Chair Rotty aIled the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
Members Pr sent: Rotty, Larson, Barker and Heman
Members A sent: Johnson
Also Presen: Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; Lee Smick, Planning
Coordinator d Michael Schultz, Associate Planner
2.
y called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
3.
Planning Co rdinator Smick informed the Commission that nominations for Planning
Commission hair and Vice Chair must be held at this time. MOTION by Larson, second
by Barker to ominate Rotty as Commission Chair. YES: Larson, Barker, Heman; NO:
None; ABST N: Rotty; MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Barker, second by Rotty
to nominate arson as Vice Chairman. YES: Rotty, Barker, Heman; NO: None;
ABSTAIN: L son. MOTION CARRIED.
4.
Chairman Ro y requested comments on the January 8, 2002 Planning Commission
minutes as su mitted by staff. There were none. MOTION by Barker, second by Larson
to approve th minutes. YES: Rotty, Larson, Barker; NO: None; ABSTAIN: Heman;
MOTION C ED.
5.
1 three advertised public hearings at this time.
Planning Co ission Chair Rotty introduced the proposed commercial center and Final
PUD Agreeme t for Jon Einess of Schwiness Development, LLC
Associate PIa er Schultz presented the staff report. Schultz identified the property as
Lots 3 & 4, lock 1 in Dakota County Estates 9th Addition. Schultz stated that the
proposed co ercial buildings totaled 17,534 square feet and were designed with a
"market" cone t, being placed face to face, with each building allowing four (4) or more
tenants. The b ildings would be constructed of brick, stucco, concrete block (two colors)
and large glass.
listed the uses that would be permitted within the commercial
development. huItz indicated that these uses were agreed upon between the developer
and the City st ff and were based from the B-1 (Limited Business) district. Schultz
indicated that s e uses were restricted due to the design such as drive through pick-up
windows. Schu z stated that any uses not listed within the agreement must be approved
through either a onditional use permit or through an amendment of the PUD Agreement.
Associate Plann r Schultz indicated that the applicant is seeking approval for two (2)
proposed modifi ations to the City Code as part of the development. The first is a setback
of eight (8) feet stead of the minimum ten (10) feet to the parking lot setback along the
west property lin . The second request is to place the proposed pylons (one on each lot)
ten (10) feet offt e property line instead of the minimum fifty (50) feet. Schultz explained
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
February 12,2002
that the subject lots contain a fifteen (15) foot right-of-way easement from which all of the .
measurements are originating.
Chairman Rotty asked if the applicant had anything to add to the staff report.
Jon Einess, Schwiness, LLC, briefly discussed the proposed commercial development
outlining some of the project difficulties.
Chairman Rotty asked if there were any questions from the public. There were none.
Chairman Rotty asked Mr. Einess about the types of uses that are intended. Mr. Einess
responded that they letters of intent with five tenants that included a video store, hair care,
nail care, delivery only pizza and also a sandwich restaurant.
Chairman Rotty asked the applicant if they anticipated any uses that were not apart of the
permitted list or would require a conditional use. Mr. Einess responded that he did not
anticipate needing a CUP.
Rotty reminded the applicant of the Fire Marshall's findings that certain uses may require
the building to be sprinkled. Mr. Einess responded that they were going out for bids in
order to calculate the costs.
Chairman Rotty asked about the size of the proposed pylon signs on this project compared
to the property to the north. Planner Schultz stated that the owner went to the maximum
allowed under the sign ordinance (150 sq. ft.) and was granted a 33-foot variance.
Commissioner Larson stated that the only issue he has is the amount of signs along Pilot
Knob Road. Larson asked the applicant if he had considered monument signage. Mr.
Einess responded that due to the elevation of the site below the roadway, they felt a pylon
sign would work better.
.
Commissioner Larson asked if a monument sign would work on the property. Schultz
responded that a monument would work but need a taller base. Mr. Einess added that a
monument would be possible but given the site elevation and the speed of the traffic (on
Pilot Knob Road) that a pylon sign is more desirable among the tenants.
Commissioner Larson asked if this is an item that can be discussed later. Planner Schultz
indicated that because the application is for Final PUD approval everything falls under the
"umbrella" of the approval.
Commissioner Heman inquired about the exterior lighting of the building. The applicant
and the Commission discussed the location of wall lighting and the light standard parking
lot lighting. The applicant clarified that he does not intend to have wall lighting on the
residential side of either building.
Chairman Rotty stated that the modification of the parking lot setback did not appear to be
an issue because it would allow for a better turning radius for traffic, trucks and emergency
vehicles. Rotty moved on to the pylon setback modification; stating that even though the
Commission has recently pushed for commercial monument signage, especially along Pilot
Knob Road, this may not be the best instance to require it given the topography of the site.
.
2
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
February 12,2002
MOTION y Barker, second by Larson to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED MOTION by Larson, second by Barker to forward a recommendation of
approval to the City Council to approve the Final PUD Agreement with the following
attached mo ifications
Noted Modi lcations:
1. The par . ng lot setback of eight (8) feet is acceptable as measured from the Pilot Knob
Road ri ht-of-way easement, instead of the minimum ten (10) foot required setback,
this is a eviation of two (2) feet. (Measured from the west property line to the curb is
twenty-t ee (23) feet).
2. yard setback for the two pylon signs to be located ten (10) feet is acceptable
as meas red from the Pilot Knob Road right-of-way easement, instead of the minimum
fifty (50 foot required setback, this is a deviation of forty (40) feet. (Measured from
the west roperty line to the edge of the sign is twenty-five (25) feet).
6.
Approval ba ed on the following contingencies:
1. The P Agreement shall be contingent upon the applicant's acquisition of Lot 3,
Block 1, akota County Estates 9th Addition.
Planning Ch irman Rotty presented the Carr Comer Preliminary and Final Plat for the
applicant Ti Carr.
Planning Coo dinator Lee Smick presented the staff report. Smick reported that the plat
consisted of ve (5) single-family lots on 2.7 acres, of which two (2) of the lots contain
existing home, one being the Akin House and the other a newly constructed home by Tim
Carr. Planne Smick stated that the remaining three (3) lots would be sold to potential
builders.
Chairman Ro y asked about the depths of the (vacant) lots. Smick replied that the typical
lot depth is 13 feet when the lot width is (at the minimum) 75 feet to meet (the minimum)
10;000 ,sqmiieeet requirement.
. . - ~ ..,
Smick pointed out that the City's Traffic Engineer is requiring that the future driveway on
Lot 3 be plac d as far to the west of the lot as possible to avoid traffic conflicts at the
intersection of 193rd Street W. and Akin Road.
Chairman Rott asked the developer if he had anything to add to the staff report. He did
not. Chairman Rotty asked if there were any questions or comments from the public.
Kevin Cook, 266 193rd Street W., voiced concern over the proposed lot widths in
comparison to he surrounding properties that are wider. Asked who the builder(s) would
be and what th price range of the homes would be.
Chairman Rott responded by stating that the lot width of 75 feet meets the minimum
required within the R-l Zoning District. Rotty asked if he has builder or price range in
mind.
3
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
February 12,2002
Tim Carr replied that things are preliminary and have not determined if a builder or .
homebuyer would buy them.
Andrew Gwilt, 19282 Encore Ct., is there a minimum setback off Akin Road and is there
any restrictions on tree removal.
Planner Smick replied that Akin Road has been downgraded to a collector and the
minimum setback is now 20-feet. The City Ordinance does not restrict tree removal from
private property.
Chairman Rotty asked if Mr. Cook's home would be setback further off Akin Road than
the future homes (in Carr Comer) would be. Planner Smick stated that she was not aware
of what Mr. Cook's home setback was and would need to research that.
Chairman asked if there were any questions from the Commission. There were none.
Rotty stated that the City anticipated platting of this property with the service stubs that
were put in place and the plat meets the minimum standards of the City Code.
MOTION by Larson, second by Heman to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Barker, second by Larson to forward a recommendation of
approval of the Carr Comer Preliminary and Final Plat onto the City Council. APIF,
MOTION CARRIED.
7.
Planning Commission Chairman Rotty asked about the workshop meeting with the City
Council. Planner Smick stated that a workshop would be held on Wednesday, February
20th to discuss to the recreational vehicle discussion.
.
8. There being no further business. MOTION by Heman, second by Larson to adjourn the
meeting at this time. APIF, MOTION APPROVED.
Respectfully submitted,
Michael Schultz
Associate Planner
Approved
3//2/02
~
.
4
.
.
.
Planning Commission
Minutes
Regular Meeting
March 12, 2002
1. Chair Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
Members Present: Rotty, Larson, Barker, Johnson and Heman
Membersi\bsent:~one
Also Present: Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; Lee Smick, Planning
Coordinator and Michael Schultz, i\ssociate Planner
2. Chairman Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
3. Chairman Rotty requested comments on the February 12, 2002 Planning Commission
minutes as submitted by staff. There were none. MOTION by Barker, second by Larson
to approve the minutes. YES: Rotty, Larson, Barker; NO: ~one; ABSTAIN: Heman;
MOTION CARRIED.
Rotty opened all four advertised public hearings at this time.
4.
Planning Commission Chair Rotty introduced the proposed Middle Creek East Preliminary
Plat for DR Horton and Ncon Development.
Planner Smick informed the Commission that the Developers have decided to withdraw the
plat. Smick stated that this item would return at the next regularly scheduled Planning
Commission meeting.
5.
Planning Chairman Rotty introduced the Middle Creek Estates Final Plat for DR Horton
and Ncon Development.
i\ssociate Planner Schultz presented the staff report for the proposed 26-lot plat. Schultz
presented the Commission a slightly revised plat concerning the combination of outlots and
the correction to the 75-foot setback requirement from the DNR wetland.
Planning Chair Rotty asked if there were any questions from the Commission. There were
none at this time.
Rotty asked if the Developer had anything to add to the staff report. Larry Frank, Ncon
Development, added that they and the Haley's have agreed to remove the driveway onto
.Akin Road and reconstruct a new drive off the cul-de-sac road.
Chairman Rotty asked if there were any issues relating to swapping the property, the
retaining wall or monument signage. Schultz stated that Mr. Haley has indicated is aware
that he will be responsible for the retaining wall. Schultz explained that the Developer
would add an easement under the development monument that would be placed against
each of the 26 property owner's titles as being responsible for the maintenance of the sign.
Schultz explained to the Commission that Mr. Haley would need to file for a Waiver of
Plat to split the proposed outlot and right-of-way in order to swap the properties prior to
platting to avoid having Mr. Haley to sign off on the plat.
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
March 12,2002
Larson asked about the tree preservation plan in relation to the plat. Schultz stated that the
Developer has made efforts to preserve as many of the large trees stands as possible.
Schultz added that the Developer, builders and staff would be working on saving additional
trees through customization of the home. Larson added that he appreciated the increase in
the street width from 28-feet to 32-feet.
Rotty asked if there were any other questions from the Commission. There were none.
MOTION by Johnson, second by Larson to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Larson, second by Johsnon to forward a recommendation of
approval of the Middle Creek Estates Final Plat onto the City Council contingent upon the
following:
a. Revise plat for 75-foot buffer easement;
b. File Outlot B as a conservation area with Dakota County (after plat is filed);
c. File OutIots A, B, E, F & G to the City;
d. Continue working with staff in preserving mature trees during building permit review;
e. Mr. Haley submit Waiver of Plat application to split property prior to Final Plat
approval.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
6.
Planning Commission Chairman Rotty introduced the City Center Preliminary and Final
Plat for Tom Wartman.
Associate Planner Schultz presented a brief staff report concerning the Preliminary and
Final Plat for City Center 2nd Addition. Schultz explained that the proposed plat would re-
plat the original City Center area and create two additional commercial lots as part of the
redevelopment of the former Elm Park dump site.
Chairman Rotty asked the applicant if he had anything to add to the report. He stated that
he did not but would be available to take questions.
Chairman Rotty asked if there were any questions or comments from the public. There
were none.
Rotty asked if there were any questions from the Commission.
Chair Rotty asked what the time frame was to improve the service road off I st Street. Mr.
Wartman responded that they intend to complete the improvement of that service drive
when the Econo Foods expansion is completed, probably by October or November. Rotty
stressed concern over traffic congestion along Elm Street and that the improvement of the
service road likely could alleviate some of those problems.
Larson asked if the DNR has requested trout stream designation signs along the Vermillion
in the proposed park location. Schultz stated that the DNR had not indicated that to staff.
2
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
March 12,2002
Being no further questions. MOTION by Larson, second by Johnson to close the public
hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Barker, second by Johnson to
forward a recommendation of approval to the City Council contingent upon the following:
a. The necessary drainage & utility easement be included within the Final Plat to be
presented to City Council;
b. Identify recently vacated streets and drainage & utility easement(s) within the Final
Plat to be presented to City Council;
c. Dedicate Outlot A over to the City as parkland.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
7. Commission Chairman Rotty introduced the proposed Sign Ordinance Amendment for
Title 4, Chapter 3: SignslBillboards.
Planning Coordinator Smick presented the staff report concerning the proposed
amendments to the City's Sign Ordinance to allow for scoreboards and advertising on
scoreboards. Smick presented the proposed plan from ISD 192 for the High School
baseball and softball fields. Smick stated that the advertising would only be permitted
athletic complex scoreboards.
Rotty asked if the applicant had any comments to add to the staff report. They did not at
this time but would be available for questions.
Chair Rotty asked if there were any questions or comments from the public. There were
none.
John Frank, 913 Westgail Ct, (representing the interests of ISD 192) requested that
because of additional sponsorship interest to allow for advertising to be placed on the
softball field scoreboards.
Chairman Rotty asked staff if there was a reason why the softball field scoreboards were
excluded from advertising. Smick replied that it was not apart of the initial proposal and
was not aware of the request. Smick stated that the ordinance could be redrafted to allow
for advertising on the softball field scoreboards also before being sent to the Council.
Chairman Rotty reiterated that the school district would review each request concerning
safety and aesthetics in mind. Doug Bonar, ISD 192, replied that the District would review
each request thoroughly.
MOTION by Barker, second by Heman to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Johnson, second by Heman to amend Section 4-3-2 (A):
Permitted Signs and Section 4-3-3 (C): Advertising Signs with the amended language to
allow for advertising on the back of the scoreboards on the softball fields. APIF,
MOTION CARRIED.
8. Chairman Rotty introduced for the discussion the appeal of the zoning decision for Mr.
Fred Conlan concerning the allowed screening for the car wash located at 8 8th Street.
3
.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
March 12,2002
Planner Smick presented the staff report concerning the applicant's appeal of Planning
staffs decision to allow for a replacement fence that in the applicant's opinion not to the
standard of the original requirements of the approved Conditional Use Permit.
Rotty stated the Commission would hear both sides and try and render a fair decision.
Rotty asked that Mr. Conlan present his issues first.
Mr. Conlan read a statement of issues ranging from the height, construction and spacing of
the boards concerning the privacy fence; the operation of outside car vacuums; exterior
lighting (in rear of building) and hours of operation. Mr. Conlan requested that a time
frame be placed on when these issues would be resolved. Mr. Conlan also requested that
his appeal fee be returned because he feels the property and/or fence is not in compliance.
Mat Svela, car wash owner (along with father), did not have anything to add but would
take questions.
Chairman Rotty asked what the hours of operation were. Mr. Svela responded that the car
wash operated from sunrise to 10 p.m.
Rotty asked how long the family has owned the property. Mr. Svela stated from
approximately 1985. Rotty asked if the rear lights were in place since purchase of the
property. A security light has been installed over one of the doors for security purposes.
.
Mr. Svela stated that he did have conversations with the Mr. Conlan about the height of the
fence. Mr. Svela agreed to raise the fence by adding horizontal boards along the bottom to
add height. Mr. Svela also stated that the car vacuum cleaners were in place when
purchased and that they have made many improvements to the property since purchased.
Chairman Rotty stated that the City has adopted ridged screening requirements to buffer
commercial and residential properties. Rotty stated it was his opinion that the fence did
not meet the qualifications of either today's City Code or the intent of the CUP in 1965.
Rotty stated that he was not aware of how the wall lighting affected Mr. Conlan's property
in relation to the height of the fence. Schultz informed the Commission of the City Code
ordinance restricting the glare of exterior lighting to neighboring properties. Rotty stated
that he would be comfortable requiring the property owner make adjustments to correct the
glare into Mr. Conlan's property.
Commissioner Heman stated that he would be comfortable if the car wash owners
corrected the fence back to a "solid" appearance and close the original height. Also if the
exterior lighting was adjusted so there was no spill on Mr. Conlan's property.
Commissioners Larson, Johnson and Barker agreed with the statements of Commissioners
Rotty and Heman.
Chairman Rotty informed the applicant that it was not the Commission's responsibility to
set or waive City fees.
.
Rotty stated that car vacuums were in place prior to the ownership of the Svela's. Rotty
clarified the positions that the Commission took concerning corrections needed to the fence
and the exterior lighting.
4
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
March 12,2002
The Commission agreed that all matters be resolved within 60 days of the decision of the
Planning Commission or 60 days upon resolution of an appeal.
MOTION by Rotty, second by Johnson that the Commission hold up the appeal of the
applicant concerning the following:
a. The fence be modified to provide 100% screening;
b. The exterior lighting be reviewed and corrected to not spill onto the adjacent property;
c. The Commission takes a neutral position on the waiver of the appeal fee.
Contingent that these matters be addressed within 60 days of the decision of the Planning
Commission or 60 days upon resolution of an appeal. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
9. Rotty introduced an added item by staff concerning the amendment of the Zoning Map.
Planner Smick stated that staff is intending to send out notice to residents if they had
questions and comments prior to a public hearing. Smick added that staff is anticipating
holding the actual public hearing during the second meeting in April.
The Commission and staff discussed the process in which resident comments would be
addressed and if there were disagreements in the rezoning of their property. Smick replied
that staff would need to have the Zoning Map comply with the 2020 Comprehensive Plan
Map.
The Commission and staff discussed holding several open house meetings to allow resident
questions and comments be addressed by staff prior holding the public hearing. The
Commission also agreed that the second meeting in April be reserved for discussion
involving amendment of the City Zoning Map.
10.
Commissioner Rotty asked if there were any other items to be discussed. There being no
further business the Commission agreed to adjourn.
Respectfully submitted,
Michael Schultz
Associate Planner
~~J-
Approved
Date
5
.
.
.
Planning Commission
Minutes
Regular Meeting
March 26, 2002
1.
Chair Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
Members Present: Rotty, Larson, Barker, Johnson and Heman
Members Absent: None
Also Present: Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; Lee Smick, Planning
Coordinator and Michael Schultz, Associate Planner
Chairman Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
2. Chairman Rotty opened the public hearing calling for an ordinance amendment to Section
10-5-1 of the City Code referring to the City's Zoning Map.
Planning Coordinator Smick presented the staff report. Smick briefly outlined each of the
proposed changes concerning a proposed Zoning change, a proposed Comprehensive
Plan change or both. Smick presented the proposed changes by each of the City's
Neighborhood Districts.
Smick discussed the proposal of identifying City owned park and open space property
with the adjacent zoning category partly due to the elimination of the C-l district. Smick
stated that parks are a permitted use within most of the zoning categories.
Planner Smick explained to the Commission staff's proposal of identifying PUD's by
zoning category (PUD) along with identifying the Ordinance number. Smick also
explained that the land use categories would be identified by color (according to land use
density).
Smick also explained that the Spruce Street Corridor District is not shown on the
proposed Zoning Map due to the need for a master plan for the whole area south of
C.S.A.H. 50 and north of 220th Street.
The Commission and staff discussed the issue relating to how City parks and open space
is identified on the Zoning Map. The Commission voiced concern how it may be
confusing to some people that City parks may be able to be developed with the
appearance on the map of "undeveloped" space. Staff agreed that a new parks and open
space zoning district could be adopted to identify these areas; this could be accomplished
during the next Commission meeting.
The Commission and staff discussed proposed changes as each area was discussed. The
staff noted the suggestions by the Commission and would make the appropriate changes.
Chairman Rotty requested any questions or comments from the public. Rotty reminded
the public that due to the amount of information received by the Commission that they
would reserve taking any action until the next meeting.
David Otterblad, 28 Pine Street, requested to maintain his property as an R-3 District,
which it is currently zoned. Mr. Otterblad stated that he thought the area would be
compatible to allow for the construction of townhomes due to the location of schools,
parks, businesses, the downtown and access to Elm Street. Mr. Otterblad also suggested
that due to the cost of the upgrade of Pine Street, those costs could be spread across a
number of units instead to just a few properties. The property owner felt that if the area
would be rezoned to an R-I or R-2 Zoning District the area would not redevelop.
.
Smick pointed out to the Commission that staff is actually suggesting a change from Low
Density to Low/Medium Density. Schultz explained that the proposed R-2 Zoning
District would be consistent with the zoning pattern around the central core of the
downtown.
Phyllis Kelly, 18 Pine Street, voiced opposition against keeping the property zoned R-3
to allow for the construction of townhomes. The property owner stated that she didn't
think that townhomes would fit in with the existing single-family.
Dan Simon, 18 Pine Street, gave a brief history of how City services became available
for the existing properties with the construction of the first Middle School. Mr. Simon
also voiced opposition against maintaining an R-3 zoning district.
Planner Smick briefly explained how the properties along Pine Street were rezoned at the
time quad home developments was proposed, just north of the properties.
The Commission agreed to take the statements given by all of the property owners into
account and allow staff to research the issues further. The Commission directed staff to
research all issues discussed at tonight's meeting to be brought back to the April 9th
meeting.
.
3.
Commissioner Rotty asked if there were any other items to be discussed. There being no
further business the Commission agreed to adjourn.
Respectfully submitted,
Michael Schultz
Associate Planner
;YJS
s /1'110-;).
Approved
Date
.
.
.
.
Planning Commission
Minutes
Regular Meeting
April 9, 2002
1.
Chair Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
Members Present: Rotty, Larson, Barker, Johnson and Heman
Members Absent: Heman
Also Present: Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; Lee Smick, Planning
Coordinator and Michael Schultz, Associate Planner
Chairman Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
2. Chairman Rotty requested comments on the February 12, 2002 Planning Commission
minutes. There were none. MOTION by Larson, second by Barker to accept the
minutes as submitted. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
Chairman Rotty noted that the minutes for the March 12, 2002 meeting would be tabled
until the next Planning Commission meeting.
Planning Commission Chair Rotty opened all the scheduled public hearings at this time.
3.
Chairman Rotty introduced the variance application from Thomas and Linda Albertson,
1001 4th Street, to expand a non-conforming structure and encroach 2.76 feet into the
minimum front yard setback.
Associate Planner Schultz presented the staff report. Schultz briefly explained the new
variance ordinance that was adopted with the Zoning Code. Schultz indicated that the
new ordinance identifies that anyone of the provisions need to be met while the previous
requirement was that all of the provisions needed to met to grant variance approval.
Chair Rotty asked the applicant if they had any additional comments to the staff report.
They did not. Rotty asked if there were any questions from the public. There were none.
Rotty asked if there were any questions from the Commissioners. There were none.
Rotty stated that he felt that the applicant met criteria #2, 3 and 4 of the variance
ordinance.
MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker to close the public hearing for item 3a. APIF,
MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Larson, second by Johnson to approve the
variance to encroach the 2.76 feet into the front yard setback with a proposed addition to
the legal non-conforming house. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
4.
Planning Chairman Rotty introduced the Farmington Acres Preliminary & Final Plat for
M & M Homes.
Associate Planner Schultz presented the staff report for the proposed plat. Schultz
indicated that the developer did submit additional information earlier in the day, but
Engineering staff did not have sufficient time to complete a review, but did state that
some of the minor issues appeared to be addressed.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
April 9, 2002
Chairman Rotty asked the applicant, Maureen Juaire, if she had any additional comments
to the staff report. She did not. Rotty asked if there were any questions or comments
from the public.
.
Jill Franke, 3359 213th Street W., voiced concern over the location of the surveyed
property line, concerned of the lack of communication with the developer concerning the
proposed property conveyance.
Maureen Juaire responded by stating that they have allotted a 14-foot outlot to be
conveyed. Juaire added that this issue is in the hands of her attorney who be contacting
the property owner and/or their attorney.
Chairman Rotty stated that the issue appears to be a private property line dispute but it
was the Commission's duty to ensure that the plat did not involve any property not
owned by the developer.
Rotty asked the City Attorney if this was an issue to be determined by the Commission.
City Attorney Poehler indicated that it would be fine to forward the plat to the Council
but the property line issue would need to be address prior to the plat be filed at the
County.
Commissioner Larson asked what issues were still outstanding from the original
Engineering letter. Schultz indicated that #3 was the only major issue that needed to be
addressed. Commissioner Larson voiced concern over the proposed location of the catch
basin and if was acceptable to City Engineering.
.
Chairman Rotty suggested continuation of the public hearing to allow the developer time
to address the property line and property conveyance issues and also any engineering
issues.
MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker to continue the public hearing to the May 14,
2002 Planning Commission meeting. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
5. Chairman Rotty introduced the Giles Addition Preliminary Plat involving nine (9) single-
family lots and one (1) tot lot.
Planning Associate Planner Schultz presented the staff report. Schultz informed the
Commission that staff is recommending a continuance of the public hearing to allow the
applicant additional time to submit the requested information. Schultz stated that the
developer is agreeable to the continuation.
Chairman Rotty asked if the Commission had any questions.
Commissioner Johnson voiced concern over the location of the proposed tot lot. Schultz
replied that the Parks and Recreation Commission and Director are comfortable with the
proposed location. Schultz indicated he would forward those concerns to the Director.
Rotty asked if there were any questions from the public.
.
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
April 9, 2002
Brian Walters, 18930 English Ave, voiced concern that the area to the north of his
home was not large enough to construct both a home and place a tot lot on. Also voiced
concern over future drainage onto his property.
Chair Rotty clarified the policy of the City that all new development handle drainage
produced by the development. Schultz concurred.
Julie Endersbee, 5322 189th Street, Asked how Lot I compared to the other lots within
the Silver Springs development. Schultz indicated that the lot does meet the minimum
10,000 square foot requirement. The resident added that the neighborhood residents
would encourage the additional park space. Also voiced concern over the street lighting
along English Ave and 1 90th Street.
Rotty asked that the lighting issue be brought back to Engineering for review.
MOTION by Larson, second by Johnson to continue the public hearing to the May 14,
2002 meeting. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
6. Chairman Rotty introduced the proposed City Code amendment to Section 1O-6-4(L)
involving off-street parking of recreational vehicles.
Planning Coordinator Lee Smick presented the staff report. Smick briefed the
Commission on the details of the proposed Ordinance.
The Commission voiced concern over the amount of time that recreation vehicles may be
parked on the public right-of-way, especially when loading or unloading. Smick stated
that the proposed ordinance could be reworded to reference the existing language in the
Code that would allow recreational vehicles be parked on the street for up to 72 hours.
Discussion ensued concerning the required edging for parking on decorative rock. The
Commission decided that the edging should remain and review the requirement in the
future.
The Commission also raised concern over when the ordinance would be adopted to allow
people a "grace period" to comply. It was agreed that a warning letter would first be
issued to residents before any violation notices were given.
Chair Rotty asked if there were any questions or comments from the public. There were
none.
MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Barker, second by Johnson to approve the Amendment to
Section 10-6-4 (L) Off-street parking-Recreational Vehicles with the addition to
referencing Section 9-1-9 of the City Code and striking "within 90 days" from Section 3.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
7.
Chairman Rotty introduced the proposed Amendment to Section 10-5-5 (C): A-I
Agriculture Uses to allow soil pulverizing operation as an Interim Use for the applicant,
Friedges, Inc.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
April 9, 2002
Planning Coordinator Smick presented the staff report.
Chairman Rotty asked the applicant if they had anything to add to the staff report. Todd
Brennen, representing Friedges, Inc, stated that they have recently upgraded Fairgreen
and 210th Street with class 5. Also are developing a reclamation plan for the site.
.
Chairman Rotty asked if there were any questions or comments from the Commission.
Rotty stated that he did not see the operation as causing a negative impact to the city.
Commissioner Larson questioned the concrete that is located within the pit.
Planner Smick clarified that the concrete currently is located on the adjacent Huber
mining pit. Mr. Brennen responded that that they plan on crushing the concrete possibly
this year.
MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
MOTION by Johnson, second by Larson to forward a recommendation of approval to
amend Section 10-5-5 (C) to include Soil Pulverization as an Interim Use within the A-I
(Agriculture) District. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION by Larson, second by Johnson to approve the Interim Use Permit for Friedges,
Inc. contingent upon the following:
I. The termination date fro the Interim Use Permit is one year after approval by the City
Council;
2. The hours for the pulverizing operation are Monday through Saturday from 7:00 a.m.
to 5 p.m.;
3. Fairgreen Avenue and 210th Street is to be maintained in a drivable state with the
addition of Class 5 and grading when applicable;
4. C.S.A.H. 50 is to be maintained with a clean driving surface and any debris or
soil/gravel be removed immediately;
5. Dust controls be utilized during the frequent hauling of material on Fairgreen Ave
and 210th Street.
.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
8. Chairman Rotty introduced the application to Amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan from
Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential for David Otterblad, 28 Pine
Street
Planning Coordinator Smick presented the staff report. Smick stated that the
applicant is seeking the amendment to comply with the current R-3 (Medium
Density Residential) Zoning District. Smick indicated that the applicant is
interested in having his property developed for townhomes.
Discussion ensued concerning the history of the previous rezoning involving the
proposed multi-family development and the four lots located on Pine Street. City
Attorney Poehler clarified the language of the State Statute stating that failure to
.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
April 9, 2002
.
receive notification does not invalidate a public hearing. Smick added that staff
has been unable to determine if notice was sent not that a notice was not sent.
Planner Smick added that the other property owners along Pine Street have
request that the properties be rezoned R -1.
Rotty asked if there were any comments from the applicant.
Attorney Haan, Law Office of Hvistendahl and Moersch, representing the
applicants stated that the applicants are not requesting rezoning, but to maintain
the R-3 District. Mrs. Haan noted a number of arguments for maintaining the
current zoning on the property referencing the letter dated March 29, 2002.
Rotty asked the City Attorney if the comments made by Mrs. Haan were accurate.
City Attorney Poehler stated that the Comp Guide Plan by State Statute is more
than simply a flexible guide plan but is an official document related to zoning.
Rotty asked if there were any comment or questions from the public.
Dan Simon, 18 Pine Street, questioned the proposal by the potential developer to
pave Pine St. Also questioned how the adjacent residents would be assessed. The
resident also voiced concern over the proximity of the (1 DO-year) flood zone.
.
Oran Weierke, 10 Pine Street, voiced concern over the location and potential
development adjacent to the flood plain and how it may affect current residents.
Rotty asked if there were any questions from the Commissioners.
Commissioner Johnson questioned which map took precedence. City Attorney
Poehler explained that the Zoning Map is required to follow the Comprehensive
Plan. Johnson stated that the City has been working on the Comprehensive plan
for a number of years and would not be in favor of not supporting a change at this
time.
Commissioner Barker also stated that he would not be favor of an amendment at
this time citing how the rezone and land use may affect the other property owners
on Pine Street.
Chairman Rotty reiterated the lengthy process that was involved in the adoption
of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Rotty stated that he would support the current
use indicated in the Comprehensive Plan.
.
David Otterblad, 28 Pine Street, questioned the previous rezoning of the
properties along Pine Street and the current notification process during the
Comprehensive Plan. City Attorney Poehler stated that publication in a
newspaper is sufficient notification.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
April 9, 2002
Discussion continued over the current process of rezoning properties to comply .
with the current 2020 Comprehensive Plan.
Phyllis Kelly, 18 Pine Street, stated that she was surprised to find out that her
property was included in the rezone to R-3.
MOTION by Barker, second by Johnson to close the public hearing. APIF,
MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker to forward a
recommendation of denial to the City Council involving the proposal to amend
the Comprehensive Plan from Low Density to Medium Density Residential.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
9. Chairman Rotty reminded the public of the informal zoning meeting that will be
held at City Hall involving properties affected by the updating of the Zoning Map
with the 2020 Comprehensive Land Use Plan. There being no further business
the Commission agreed to adjourn.
Respectfully Submitted,
Michael Schultz
Associate Planner
Approved
(;,--/1-02-
.
.
.
.
.
Planning Commission
Minutes
Special Meeting
April 23, 2002
1.
Chair Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
Members Present: Rotty, Larson, Barker, Johnson and Heman
Members Absent: None
Also Present: Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; Lee Smick, Planning
Coordinator and Michael Schultz, Associate Planner; City Attorney Matt Brokl
Chairman Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
2. Chairman Rotty introduced the Farmington Acres Preliminary and Final Plat for the
applicant M & M Homes, LLC.
Associate Planner Schultz presented the staff report. Schultz indicated that the only
engineering issue relating to the plat involves platting additional easement for the rear
catch basin. Schultz also informed the Commission of the status of the conveyance of the
fifteen (15) feet on the west end of the property from the developer to the property owner
to the west.
Rotty requested any questions or comments from the public. There were none. Rotty
requested any questions or comments from the Commission members. There were none.
MOTION by Johnson, second by Heman to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Larson, second by to forward a recommendation of approval
to the City Council contingent upon the developer submitting a revised grading and storm
sewer plan (specifically relating to Lot 2) to be approved by the Engineering Division.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
3.
Chair Rotty introduced the proposed amendment to Title 4-6 of the Farmington City
Code concerning the demolition of buildings or structures.
Community Development Director Carroll presented the proposed ordinance amendment
for Title 4-6 of the City Code involving certain requirements for the review and approval
of demolition permits. Carroll stated that this ordinance amendment is being proposed
with the continued redevelopment of existing property within the City. Carroll briefly
outlined the proposed ordinance for the Commission.
Commissioner Larson asked how the proposed ordinance affects the (St. Michael's)
Catholic Church property. Carroll replied that the property owner has submitted for a
demolition permit and staff has requested that the applicant submit some of the same
information in the proposed ordinance. Commissioner Larson commented that he would
be in favor of the proposed ordinance.
Chairman Rotty asked for any public comment or questions involving the proposed
ordinance. There were none.
Rotty asked for any additional comments from the Commission.
Planning Commission Minutes
Special Meeting
April 23, 2002
Commissioner Barker stated that he was in favor of the proposed ordinance.
.
Commissioner Johnson questioned the timing of the proposed ordinance in relation to the
St. Michael's Church redevelopment plan. Chairman Rotty commented that any legal
issues involving the proposed ordinance would need to be handled by the City Council
and City Attorneys.
Commissioner Heman stated that he was in favor of the proposed ordinance because it
would protect the City against any liabilities and damages.
MOTION by Barker, second by Johnson to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Larson, second by Johnson to forward a recommendation of
approval to the City Council noting the concern by the Commission how the proposed
ordinance may affect the St. Michael's Church property. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
4. Commission Chair Rotty Amendment to Title 10-5 of the Farmington City Code
Concerning Parks and Open Space.
Planning Coordinator Smick presented the proposed ordinance amendment involving the
adoption of a Parks and Open Space Zoning District. Smick indicated that the proposed
zoning district was the result of a March 26, 2002 Planning Commission meeting
requesting a park district in order to better identify the City's parks and open space
properties.
Rotty asked if there were any questions or comments from the public. There were none.
.
Rotty asked about the permitted use of agriculture in the Parks & Open Space District.
Smick indicated that some of the uses were carried over from the Conservation Zoning
District. Rotty also inquired about allowing feed lots within the district. Staff suggested
that public gardening could replace agriculture within the proposed uses. Community
Development Director Carroll gave examples of when agriculture may be allowed to
continue on the property until developed into a public park.
The Commission agreed that agriculture would remain under permitted use along with
the addition of non-commercial nursery and public gardening and also deleting feed lots
from the conditional uses.
MOTION by Larson, second by Heman to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker to forward a recommendation of
approval amending Title 10-5 of the City Code involving the creation of a Parks & Open
Space zoning district contingent upon the proposed changes as discussed. APIF,
MOTION CARRIED.
5. Chairman Rotty introduced the proposed amendments to the 2020 Comprehensive Plan.
Rotty briefed the public on the process involved with updating the City's Comprehensive
Plan and Zoning Map.
Associate Planner Schultz presented the staff report involving the proposed
Comprehensive Plan amendments for certain properties. Schultz indicated that most of
the proposed amendments were a result ofthe recent adoption of the City's Zoning Code .
2
.
Planning Commission Minutes
Special Meeting
April 23, 2002
or the possibility of a change in land use since the adoption of the 2020 Comprehensive
Plan in 1999.
Planner Schultz presented each of the proposed 2020 Comprehensive Land Use Plan
amendments.
Area #1: Planner Schultz presented the proposal to amend the following properties from
Industrial to Business:
28 - 8th Street
27 - 5th Street
510 Willow Street
500 Willow Street
504 Willow Street
709 Pine Street
Chairman Rotty requested any questions or comments from the public.
Kurt Kuno, Peerless Plastic, Inc., requested that if his property is to be rezoned from I-
I to B-3 (as proposed) that the use of Light Manufacturing is allowed as a permitted use
instead of a conditional use.
Rotty clarified with staff that any use amendments would need to occur at a separate
hearing. Rotty asked if the existing use would be grand fathered. Schultz stated that the
use would still be permitted if the City Council adopts the B-3 district.
Steve Finden, 28 8tb Street, Dakota Lumber Co., requested that his property be zoned
B-3 instead of the proposed B-1, stating that he felt the use of the property as a storage or
warehousing yard or even truck terminal was more appropriate in the B-3 district.
.
City Attorney Brokl suggested that the Commission take action after each proposed land
use amendment.
MOTION by Larson, second by Barker to forward a recommendation of approval to the
City Council amending the 2020 Comprehensive Land Use Plan for the properties
described in Area #1 from Industrial to Business. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
Area #2: Planner Schultz presented the proposal to amend the following properties from
Public/Semi-Public to Commercial and High Density Residential: 3410 213th Street, 3330
213th Street
Allison Korns, 1000 Oak Street, stated that the proposed transition of zoning was not
necessary because of the existing trees within the existing open space. The resident also
noted the number of single-family homes within the neighborhood.
Planner Schultz clarified to the Commission and the public that the only portion of the
property that is being considered as party of the proposed amendment is the north half of
the hospital property and not the south half containing the open space.
.
The Commission and staff discussed moving up the public hearing for the proposed
rezoning of the area involving the hospital property. The City Attorney suggested that
the Commission take public testimony on the both the proposed Comprehensive Land
Use amendment for the entire property and any testimony on the proposed rezoning to R-
3 (Medium Density) on the south half of the property.
3
Planning Commission Minutes
Special Meeting
April 23, 2002
Chairman Rotty agreed and informed the residents that a vote would not be taken until all
of the proposed amendments have been heard but would poll the Commissioners to
indicate which way they would vote.
.
Chris Kohler, 405 10th Street, Voiced concern over not knowing what the potential land
development may consist off, requested that any proposed development be required to
have its own private park area to avoid using Park Place private park system. Also
voiced concern that a townhome development would change the context of the East
Farmington neighborhood.
Sherri Richter, 908 Oak Street, submitted a petition from residents in the neighborhood
to against the rezoning of the property to R-3.
Deb Richter, 908 Oak Street, how do the densities and allowed uses compare between
the R-2 and R-3 districts. The resident specified her concern of allowing modular trailer
units as an allowed use within the R-3 district.
Angela Shinkel, 912 Oak Street, stated that the R-2 district would be preferred because
townhomes would allowed only as a conditional use whereas under the R-3 they would
be a permitted use. Stating that the conditional use process would allow the Commission
and neighbors to have the proposed development blend in with the existing
neighborhood.
Jeff Moinicken, 400 9th Street, voiced concern over the traffic already generated on Oak
Street.
Lamont Hunter, 80512th Street, voiced concern about the potential removal of the pond
and open space.
.
Sherri Richter asked how the residents will know if the Commission is in favor of
keeping the property zoned R-2. Chairman Rotty explained that he would ask the other
Commissioners their position on the proposed amendment and rezoning.
Kevin Hand, 509 10th Street, referenced the existing rental townhomes in the southwest
comer of the development that were a conditional use and did a good job of blending into
the neighborhood; would support the same zoning district that would require a townhome
development to go before the Commission.
The Commission, staff and residents continued discussion of the process of
comprehensive land use planning and the rezoning of properties in conformance with the
2020 Comprehensive Plan.
Chairman Rotty stated that as a Commission the Comprehensive Plan is always followed,
but in this case would be in favor of rezoning the (undeveloped portion) hospital property
as R-2 (Low/Medium Density) zoning district, which would be more appropriate for the
neighborhood.
Commissioners Larson, Barker, Johnson and Heman also voiced support of rezoning the
property to R-2.
.
4
.
Planning Commission Minutes
Special Meeting
April 23, 2002
MOTION by Larson, second by Johnson to forward a recommendation of approval to
the City Council amending the 2020 Comprehensive Land Use Plan from Public/Semi-
Public to Commercial, Medium Density Residential and High Density Residential
involving Area #2 as described within the staff report. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
Chair Rotty recommended taking a 2-minute recess. The Commission agreed.
Area #3: Planner Schultz presented the proposal to amend the following properties from
Low-Medium Density to High-Density Residential: 1020 - 3rd Street.
Rotty asked if there were any questions or comments from the pubic. There were none.
MOTION by Barker, second by Johnson to forward a recommendation of approval to the
City Council amending the 2020 Comprehensive Land Use Plan for the properties
described in Area #3 from Low-Medium Density to High-Density Residential. APIF,
MOTION CARRIED.
Area #4: Associate Planner Schultz presented the proposal to amend the following
properties from High-Density Residential to Business: 305 Main Street and 301 Main
Street.
Planner Schultz explained that these properties are being proposed in order to expand the
downtown commercial area as outlined within the 2020 Comprehensive Land Use Plan.
.
Chairman Rotty asked if the property owners were present and had any comment. The
property owners were not present. There were no comments from the public
MOTION by Johnson, second by Larson to forward a recommendation of approval to
the City Council amending the 2020 Comprehensive Land Use Plan for the properties
described in Area #4 from High Density Residential to Business. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
Area #5: Proposal to amend the following properties from Park/Open Space to Low-
Density: Property lying west of Riverside Estates.
Planner Schultz explained that the property was inadvertently shown as Park/Open Space
on the Comprehensive Plan and that the proposed amendment would result in rezoning
the property to a low density zoning district (currently zoned R-3).
Rotty asked if the property owners were present. Planner Schultz stated that the property
owners were present earlier in the meeting. Rotty stated that it was opinion that the
property is better suited as a lower density district given the number environmental and
development issues involved.
MOTION by Barker, second by Johnson to forward a recommendation of approval to the
City Council amending the 2020 Comprehensive Land Use Plan for the properties
described in Area #5 from Park/Open Space to Low-Density. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
.
Area #6: Proposal to amend the following property from Industrial to Business: 4300
220th Street.
5
Planning Commission Minutes
Special Meeting
April 23, 2002
Schultz indicated that the Dakota Electric property would not be affected by the proposed
land use change or resulting rezoning of the property. Schultz added that the current uses
of the property would be allowed to continue.
.
MOTION by Heman, second by Johnson to forward a recommendation of approval to
the City Council amending the 2020 Comprehensive Land Use Plan for the properties
described in Area #6 from Industrial to Business. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
Area #7: Planner Schultz presented the proposal to amend the following properties from
No Designation to Low-Density Residential:
3478 - 209th Street
3430 - 209th Street
3414 - 209th Street
3400 - 209th Street
3376 - 209th Street
3328 - 209th Street
3310 - 209th Street
19 Walnut Street
Schultz explained that the subject properties are proposed to be amended because of the
recent annexation of these properties from Empire Township. Rotty asked if there were
any comments from the public or Commission. There were none.
MOTION by Larson, second by Johnson to forward a recommendation of approval to
the City Council amending the 2020 Comprehensive Land Use Plan for the properties
described in Area #7 from No Designation to Low Density. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
Area #8: Planner Schultz presented the proposal to amend the following properties from
No Designation to Urban Reserve: the two parcels located on the east end of 2 13th Street
(known as the Devney and Rother properties).
.
Planner Schultz explained that the next two areas have a similar circumstance in that they
were annexed after the 2020 Comprehensive Land Use Plan was adopted.
MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker to forward a recommendation of approval to the
City Council amending the 2020 Comprehensive Land Use Plan for the properties
described in Area #8 from No Designation to Urban Reserve. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
Area #9: Planner Schultz presented the proposal to amend the following property from
No Designation to Urban Reserve: the Murphy property located near the end of 19Sth
Street W.
MOTION by Barker, second by Heman to forward a recommendation of approval to the
City Council amending the 2020 Comprehensive Land Use Plan for the property
described in Area #9 from No Designation to Urban Reserve. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker to close the public hearing and acknowledge
that all nine proposed Comprehensive Land Use amendments were approved. APIF,
MOTION CARRIED.
.
6
.
.
.
6.
Planning Commission Minutes
Special Meeting
April 23, 2002
Chairman Rotty presented the proposed ordinance amendment amending Section 10-5-1
involving the City's Zoning Map to be consistent with the current City's current Zoning
Districts as adopted.
Planning Coordinator Smick presented the staff report. Smick detailed each of the
properties that would affect by the proposed zoning changes. Smick noted that a number
of the proposed changes would reflect the just approved Comprehensive Plan
amendments. Planner Smick highlighted the changes affecting the downtown due to the
adoption of the new R-D (Downtown Residential) and R-T (Residential Transitional)
districts.
The Commission and staff discussed a number of the proposed zoning changes requesting
clarification if the existing uses were consistent with the allowed uses within the
proposed zoning districts.
Commissioner Johnson inquired about the proposed zoning of R-2 for the properties
located along Pine Street (18 - 28 Pine Street). Planner Schultz replied that staff was
attempting to only remain consistent with the remaining zoning pattern surrounding the
original town center and that the R-2 district would transition into the R-l district in the
Riverside development.
Chairman requested any questions or comments from the public.
Lori Ecklund, 421 Elm Street, stated that her property is proposed to be rezoned to the
B-2 zoning district. The resident voiced concern over having to be required to receive a
variance if any additions were proposed for the home.
Schultz explained that the property owner was correct that a variance would be required
but the proposed rezoning would be consistent with the 2020 Comprehensive Plan.
Discussion pursued involving the process and additional fees property owners would be
responsible for on improvements to non-conforming property. Chairman Rotty suggested
having the issue forwarded to the City Council to be decided since the Planning
Commission can not establish or waive any fees.
Dave Otterbla~ 28 Pine Street, stated that he was against the down zoning of his
property from the existing R-3 district.
Loren Schulz, 500 Spruce Street, Asked what would be accomplished in the (proposed)
rezoning of the former St. Michael's Church property (from R-3) to R-T.
Planner Smick replied that the proposed R-T district would allowed a greater variety of
housing and housing densities around the downtown district. Rotty added that the R-T
zoning would tighten up the allowed uses.
Dan Simon, 18 Pine Street, stated that he would prefer that the properties along Pine
Street (as previously discussed) be rezoned to R-l and not R-2 or R-3.
Chairman Rotty asked if there were any additional comments from the public. There
were none.
Rotty requested to focus discussion on the properties involved in the Pine Street rezoning.
7
Planning Commission Minutes
Special Meeting
April 23, 2002
Rotty requested comments from the Commission. Commissioner Johnson stated that the
existing single-family uses are conducive to R-l and there is no proposed
(re)development of the properties. Commissioner Larson agreed. Commissioner Heman
noted that the 2020 Comprehensive Plan indicated Low Density Residential.
Commissioner Barker agreed with the rest of the Commission adding that the park space
already may serve as a transitional zoning district.
.
Chairman Rotty asked about the earlier proposals concerning Peerless Plastics and
Dakota Lumber properties. Planner Smick stated that the B-1 is proposed for Dakota
Lumber because it would be consistent with the zoning classifications along Trunk Hwy
3. Smick also clarified that the property owner for Peerless Plastics was requesting a text
amendment that was not part of tonight's hearing.
Chairman Rotty noted that the area south of Trinity Terrace and north of Oak Street
would remain zoned as R-2.
MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker to forward a recommendation of
approval amending Section 10-5-1 of the City Code contingent upon the following:
i. The property along the north side of Pine Street be rezoned to R-l;
11. The area along Oak Street remain zoned R-2;
111. The Lampert's Lumber property be rezoned from B-2 to B-3;
IV. The area at the southeast comer of C.S.A.H. 50 and Akin Road be
rezoned to Parks/Open Space.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
7. Chairman Rotty asked if there were any additional items from the Commission or
staff. There were none. The Commission agreed to adjourn.
.
Respectfully Submitted
Michael Schultz
Associate Planner
Approved
17.- 9- 02
.
8
.
.
.
Planning Commission
Minutes
Regular Meeting
May 14,2002
1.
Chair Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
Members Present: Rotty, Larson (arrived late), Barker, Johnson and Heman
Membersl\bsent:~one
.Also Present: Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; Lee Smick, Planning
Coordinator and Michael Schultz, l\ssociate Planner; Jim Bell, Parks & Recreation
Director
Chairman Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
2. Chairman Rotty requested any comments on the March 12, 2002 as submitted. There
were none. MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
3. Chairman Rotty requested any comments on the March 26, 2002 as submitted. There
were none. MOTION by Barker, second by Johnson. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
Chairman Rotty opened all three scheduled public hearings at this time. Rotty requested if a
discussion item could moved to the front of the agenda. The Commission agreed.
4.
Chair Rotty introduced for discussion the issue involving maximum lot coverage
concerning the addition of a pool to the property located at 18627 Everest Path.
l\ssociate Planner Schultz presented the Commission a brief report. Schultz indicated
that the"City Code allows a maximum of25% lot coverage within an R-l zoning district.
Schultz stated that staff calculates all building structures as part of the lot coverage,
including pools. Planner Schultz added that he surveyed other south metro communities
and found that many cities do not have maximum coverage guidelines for residential
areas, but some others do but do not include pools as part of the calculations. Schultz
stated that staff would not be in favor of a variance but would review the possibility of
removing pools from lot coverage calculations.
Chairman Rotty asked Mr. Van Winkle if he had anything to add. Mr. Van Winkle stated
that he is prepared to file for a variance if necessary but was under the assumption that
the City had a higher lot coverage calculation.
Chair Rotty stated that the maximum lot cover calculation must be kept in place but
recommended staff to review the policy to what type of structures are included in that
calculation. Rotty asked if the Commission agreed. The Commission agreed with the
recommendation.
5.
Chairman Rotty introduced the public hearing for the Giles l\ddition Preliminary Plat for
Tim Giles of TC Construction.
l\ssociate Planner Schultz reported to the Commission that a number of outstanding
issues still exist with the proposed plat, many of which are engineering related. Schultz
informed the Commission that the applicant is seeking to revise the plat application to
include both the preliminary and fmal plat. Schultz stated that staff is recommending to
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
May 14,2002
continue the public hearing in order to allow the developer time to revise both the plat
application and plat information. .
Chairman Rotty asked if there were any public questions or comments on this matter
since the public hearing was advertised. There were none.
Chairman Rotty asked if the Commission was comfortable reviewing both the
preliminary and fmal plat simultaneously. Commissioners Johnson, Barker and Heman
were comfortable reviewing both plats. Commissioner Johnson reiterated his concern
over the park location and traffic.
Parks & Recreation Director Bell stated that the Park Commission has reviewed the plat
several times and have determined that the proposed location is the best spot for tot lot
within the plat. Bell reminded the Commission that the City has a number of parks that
front along major collectors and two along Pilot Knob Road. The Parks Commission has
requested that a sidewalk be installed on the east side of English Ave and that two
warning signs be installed also.
Commissioner Barker asked if staff could review the lighting situation at 190th Street and
English Ave. Commissioner Barker asked if screening or a fence be installed along
English Ave for additional safety purposes. Park Director Bell replied that it was Park
Commission's policy not to fence parks in and that it was cost prohibitive for the City.
MOTION by Johnson, second by Heman to continue the public hearing to the June 11,
2002 Commission meeting. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
6.
Chairman Rotty introduced the scheduled public hearing for the Middle Creek East
Preliminary Plat (Middle Creek PUD) for DR Horton and Arcon Development.
.
Planning Coordinator Smick presented the staff report.
Smick reported that staff has been working with the developer on several issues involving
park dedication and road connections. Smick stated that park issue involves the access to
the park space already dedicated in the southern portion of the development. The road
issues involve the connection of 203rd Street to the east and the road connection to the
south (future Eastview Ave) onto 20Sth Street.
Planner Smick reported on the proposed road design involving 203rd Street, indicating
that the road is proposed to narrow in the location of Mr. McCarthy's property due to the
issues involving the road easement and the encroachment of the house. Smick added that
the road would then be upgraded at the time when Mr. McCarthy's property would
develop.
Chair Rotty asked the applicant if they had any additional comments to the staff report.
Larry Frank, Arcon Development, stated that they agreed with everything in the staff
report except for the third contingency (for approval) of connecting to 20gth Street. Frank
stated that they did not own the property to make that connection and was not part of the
PUD plan. Frank added that DR Horton and Arcon Development would object to the
third contingency as part of the approval.
.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
May 14,2002
Chairman Rotty asked if there were any questions or comments from the public.
.
Dan McCarthy, 5014 203rd Street W., asked how close the grading would occur to his
home. Keith Willenbring, Probe Engineering, responded that there would be a retaining
wall next to the sidewalk and that grading would occur up to the house in order to match
the grades for the wall.
Chair Rotty asked how far the retaining wall would be from the house. Mr. Willenbring
replied that it would be 9 feet from the house and about 19 feet from the back of curb.
Mr. McCarthy asked if a trust fund would be set up for the possible disturbance of the
oak trees on the property. Chair Rotty asked staff if that had been considered. Planner
Smick replied that she would note that and discuss it with staff.
Mr. McCarthy voiced concern about the safety issues involved with the narrowing of the
street. Mr. McCarthy also asked about what affect development might have on his
private well system.
Mike McClain, 20390 Eaves Way, voiced concern about the proposed grading plan,
adding that he had been approached by DR Horton to lower the grade on his property and
requested a plan be submitted for review.
Larry Frank responded by stating that Don Patton, DR Horton, would need to respond to
the grading issue but did not see an issue with drawing up a restoration plan.
.
Mr. McClain asked when development construction would begin. Larry Frank
anticipated grading in the fall but would need to address issues with Mr. McClain.
Chairman Rotty asked if there were any other public testimony. There were none. Rotty
asked ifthere were any questions or comments from the Commission.
Commissioner Johnson asked how the City could force the developer to complete the
20Sth Street connection when the developer does not own the land. Planner Smick replied
that the City is negotiating with the property owner and the developer on the issue and
plan to the issue resolved (before final plat approval).
Commissioner Heman voiced concern over the proposed road design of 203rd Street.
Planner Smick replied that there is grade issues if the road is moved to the north adding
that staff and thedeveloper's engineer have reviewed all options. Larry Frank added that
at least five other designs have been considered and every design would affect either
property owner (to the north or south). Frank pointed out the issues involving the
encroachment of Mr. McCarthy's house into the SO-foot road easement as the biggest
difficulty in the road design.
Chairman Rotty stated that if the Commission believed the plat and the design of the
roadway were unsafe, the plat should not be forwarded to the City Council.
.
Larry Frank requested that the Commission take action on the plat in order to allow the
developer to take care of the issues involving the design of 203rd Street and 20gth Street
legally. Mr. Frank added that he feels the City is responsible for alleviating the problems
(involved with both 203rd and 20gth Streets).
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
May 14,2002
The Commission and staff discussed the actions available concerning the plat.
.
MOTION by Johnson, second by Heman to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Barker, second by Johnson to forward a recommendation of
denial to the City Council of the Middle Creek East Preliminary Plat. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
7. Chairman Rotty introduced the variance application from Pellicci Ace Hardware to locate
a 24' x 4' propane tank three feet from the property line.
Planner Smick presented the staff report. Smick stated that the State Fire Code requires
propone tanks (of that size) to be located 25' from buildings and 25' from property lines.
Smick stated that the area adjacent to the west property line is planned to be dedicated to
the City as park space. Planner Smick stated that the City Engineer is willing to negotiate
an Encroachment Agreement with the property owner.
Chairman Rotty asked if the applicants had anything to add to the staff report. They did
not. Rotty asked if there were any questions or comments from the public. There were
none.
Rotty asked if there were any questions or comments from the Commission.
Commissioner Heman asked why staff was requesting to screen the proposed tank when
the existing tank in its location is not currently screened. Smick replied that the proposed
tank would be adjacent to a City park. Chairman Rotty asked if the applicant had any
issues with construction of a fence. They replied that they did not. .
MOTION by Johnson, second by Heman to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Johnson, second by Heman to approve a 22400t
encroachment for the placement of a 24' x 4' propane tank contingent upon the
following:
i. A 6-foot high opaque solid wood fence or masonry wall is required to screen the
propane tank on three sides.
11. The property owner's enter into an Encroachment Agreement with the City
locating the tank in the 5-foot drainage and utility easement.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
8. Chairman Rotty introduced the Meadow Creek 2nd Addition Final Plat for Progress Land
Company.
Planning Coordinator Smick presented the staff report. Smick stated that the proposed
plat is a continuation of the single-family development of the Meadow Creek plat and
would involve 127 single-family lots. Smick stated that the only platting issue involves
moving the rear property line on Lots 1 & 2, Block 1 five-feet off the centerline of the
gas line.
Chairman Rotty asked if there were any questions or comments from the public. There
were none.
Chairman Rotty asked if there were any questions or comments from the Commission.
Commissioner Johnson asked if the lots affected by the property line move would still
.
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
May 14,2002
meeting the minimum lot requirement (10,000 sq. ft.). Smick stated that the lots would
need to meet the minimum requirement.
Mike Olson, Progress Land Company, stated that their surveyor has gained an easement
confinement agreement with Williams Pipeline. Mr. Olson added that the confinement
agreement should be sufficient and that the property line should not have to be moved.
Chair Rotty asked staff if this agreement would be sufficient. Community Development
Director Carroll asked if staff could receive a copy of the agreement. Mr. Olson agreed
that a copy could be forwarded to staff. The Commission agreed to add language within
the contingency to reflect the discussion.
(Commissioner Larson arrived to the meeting at this time)
Chair Rotty asked if the Commission had any additional questions. Commissioner
Heman clarified the direction in the contingency from southwest to southeast. Staff noted
correction. Commissioner Larson asked if there were any major grading issues. Smick
replied that there were only minor grading and engineering issues involved.
MOTION by Johnson, second by to contingent upon the following
i. The rear property line in Lot 1 and 2, Block I be relocated 5-feet to the southeast
of the centerline of the gas pipe or the Developer submit a confinement
agreement from Williams Pipeline to be reviewed by staff;
11. Minor engineering issues need to be addressed and approval of construction
plans for grading, storm water and utilities by the Engineering Division needs to
be granted.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
9.
Chairman Rotty introduced the sketch plan of the former St. Michael's Church property,
for the applicants Colin Garvey and Pete Elvestad, Farmington Development
Corporation.
Associate Planner Schultz presented the staff report. Schultz indicated that this review is
new requirement as part of the new Zoning Code. Planner Schultz continued by outlining
the developer's proposed townhome development.
Chairman Rotty asked if the applicant had anything to add to the staff report.
Pete Elvestad, Farmington Development Corporation, stated that the plan was stay with
the same design and floor plan because of the popularity of their Oak Street Townhome
development. Mr. Elvestad stated that that development was not specifically marketed
toward the elderly but became the primary buyers. Mr. Elvestad added that adding a two-
story townhome would cause a conflict (with the type of future homeowners).
Chair Rotty asked if there were any comments from the Commission.
Commissioner Larson commented that he thought the proposed development would work
in that neighborhood. Adding that the single-level product would be popular for elderly.
Voiced concern if the City would be consistent its review with other projects in
requesting that two-levels be part of the design.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
May 14,2002
Planner Schultz replied that the proposals by staff are suggestions that would hopefully
not only benefit the developer but also appease the surrounding property owners.
.
Commissioner Larson asked if the City has received any complaints about the appearance
of the Oak Street Townhomes. Planner Schultz replied that not since its completion but
during the initial proposal there were some resident concerns of the townhomes blending
in with the neighborhood.
Commissioner Larson and staff continued to discuss the aesthetics and design of the
proposed development.
Commissioner Heman stated that supported the concept but requested that the location of
some of the driveways be reviewed for safety purposes.
Commissioner Barker stated that he would be favor of the design concept but requested
that the developer review the possibility of moving the garages back or the house portion
forward.
Commissioner Johnson stated that he would support the concept plan.
Chairman Rotty stated that the Commission appears to be in favor of the proposed
concept that the Commission would not mandate incorporating two-level units and that
the concept would not stand out from the existing neighborhood.
10.
Planning Coordinator informed the Commission that the City Council approved a Joint
City Counci1/Planning Commission meeting on May 28, 2002 to discuss on number of
planning related issues.
.
11. Chairman Rotty asked if there were any addition items to be addressed from either the
Commission or staff. There were none. The Commission agreed to adjourn at this time.
Respectfully Submitted,
Michael Schultz
Associate Planner
Approved
7-1--02-
.
.
Planning Commission
Minutes
Regular Meeting
June 11, 2002
1.
Chair Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
Members Present: Rotty, Larson, Barker, Johnson and Heman
Members Absent: None
Also Present: Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; Lee Smick, Planning
Coordinator and Michael Schultz, Associate Planner
Chairman Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
2. Chairman Rotty requested any comments on the April 9, 2002 as submitted. There were
none. MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker. YES: Rotty, Larson, Barker,
Johnson; NO: None; ABSTAIN: Heman. MOTION CARRIED.
Chairman Rotty opened all eight scheduled public hearings at this time.
3.
Chairman Rotty introduced the continued public hearing of the Giles Addition
Preliminary Plat.
.
Associate Planner Schultz presented the staff report. Schultz stated that several planning
issues need to be addressed that include the name of the plat, a Giles Addition plat
already is on file at Dakota County. Schultz added that landscaping and the timing of the
construction of the fence along Pilot Knob Road be addressed in the Development
Contract.
Chairman Rotty asked Russ Damlo, Probe Engineering, if he had anything to add to the
staff report. Mr. Damlo stated that they are currently addressing the comments outlined
by the City Engineering Division and the change of the name of the plat has also been
considered.
Commissioner Barker asked if the lighting issue at 190th Street and English Ave been
addressed. Mr. Damlo stated that he wasn't aware of the issue. Rotty stated that the
issue could be addressed during in the Commission comments.
Chair Rotty asked if there were any questions or comments from the public. There were
none.
Commissioner Larson asked if the Developer had any issues with the landscaping or the
construction of the fence. Staff replied that the Developer has not voiced any opposition
to the proposals.
Chair Rotty reiterated the situation of the lighting at I 90th Street and English Ave. Rotty
also requested if the Engineering Division and Police Chief could review the road
striping of the intersection stating that it could be confusing (for some motorists).
.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
June 11, 2002
MOTION by Johnson, second by Larson to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Larson, second by Johnson to forward a recommendation of
approval to the City Council contingent upon the following:
.
1. The plat be re-titled to a name that is not registered with the Dakota County Plat
Office;
11. Issues relating to the timing of the construction of the (sound barrier) fence be
included in the Developer's Agreement;
111. Address any issues by the City Engineering Division;
IV. Preparation, approval and execution of a Development Contract for Farmington
Acres;
v. Submittal by the Developer of all documents, security, and fees required under
the Development Contract;
V1. Approval of the construction plans for grading, storm water and utilities by the
Engineering Division;
V11. Addition of street light at intersection of I 90th Street and English Ave.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED
4. Chairman Rotty introduced the Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the southern portion
of the Trinity Hospital Property.
Planning Coordinator Smick presented the staff report. Smick indicated the proposed
amendment was a result of the April 23, 2002 Planning Commission meeting with the
residents from the East Farmington development were opposed to the proposed rezoning
of the property.
.
Chairman Rotty asked if there were any questions or comments from the public. There
were none.
Rotty requested any questions or comments from the Commission. There were none.
MOTION by Barker, second by Johnson to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Johnson, second by Heman to forward a recommendation of
approval to the City Council to amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan from Medium
Density Residential to LowlMedium Density Residential for the property south of Trinity
Hospital and Trinity Terrace and north of Oak Street. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
Chairman Rotty asked if Mr. Transue, the applicant for the next agenda item was present. He was
not. Rotty suggested moving the item toward the end of the agenda. The Commission agreed.
5. Chairman Rotty introduced the variance application to encroach .68 feet into side yard
setback for the applicant Jeff Weldon at 19100 Embers Ave.
Planner Schultz presented the staff report. Schultz explained the circumstances involved
with the applicant in relation to construction of the deck without a building permit and
State Building Code regulations.
Chair Rotty asked if the applicant had anything to add to the staff report. They did not.
Rotty asked if there were any questions or comments from the public. There were none.
.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
June 11, 2002
.
Rotty asked if there were any questions or comments from the Commission. The
Commission felt there the applicant's proposed structure met at least two of the
requirements to grant a variance.
MOTION by Johnson, second by Larson to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Barker, second by Johnson to approve the variance
encroachment of .68 feet with the proposed deck. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
6. Chairman Rotty introduced the special exception application to move a garage structure
across public rights-of-way for the applicant Tim Young.
Associate Planner Schultz presented the staff report.
Chairman Rotty asked the applicant if he had anything to add to the staff report. Mr.
Young stated that he did not have any issues with any of the staff contingencies other
than the recommendation of closing off the access to Ash Street.
The Commission, staff and the applicant discussed the issue of closing off the access to
Ash Street and the current access from 3rd Street. Rotty stated that the Commission
would consider the request.
Chair Rotty asked if there were any questions or comments from the public. There were
none.
.
Rotty asked if there were any questions or comments from the Commission.
Commissioner Heman asked if the County would close off the access when Ash Street
would be reconstructed. Planner Smick stated that the County has reviewed the current
accesses along Ash Street and would seek closing off the driveway access.
Commissioner Larson asked if this issue were discussed when Greg Young was seeking
the variances (for the lot split). Smick stated that the driveway issue was discussed
during the variance permit review.
Discussion continued over closer of the driveway access to Ash Street and Dakota
County's role in closing off accesses during the reconstruction of Ash Street. The
Commission agreed to allow the County to deal with the access issue when Ash Street is
reconstructed.
MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker contingent upon the following:
1.
The applicant or the applicant's contractor submit a surety in the amount
determined by the City Engineer to ensure against damages to the public right-of-
way;
That the garage be placed on a permanent foundation in the location indicated on
the site plan;
That a driveway be constructed, meeting City Code standards (concrete or
bituminous surface) from Third Street only, to be completed within 45 days upon
moving the structure onto the property;
ii.
lll.
.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
June II, 2002
IV. The structure be painted to match the exterior of the existing home (see Section
4-5-5 (C) 2: Residential Performance Standards: Accessory Buildings.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
.
7. Chairman Rotty introduced the conditional use permit application to construct a church in
an R-l (Low Density) Zoning District for the applicant Farmington Lutheran Church.
Planner Schultz presented the staff report.
Chairman Rotty asked if there were any additional comments from the applicant. Ann
Kuntz, Station 19, stated that all issues address by staff could be addressed. Ms. Kuntz
and the Commission discussed that ISO-foot turning lane needed. Schultz stated that he
would verify with Shelly Johnson the comments ofthe requested turn lane.
Chair Rotty asked if there were any questions or comments from the public. There were
none.
Rotty requested questions and comments from the Commission. Commissioner Rotty
stated that even though there were be some minor impacts such as traffic, it would not be
different from any other church located with any other residential neighborhoods. The
other Commissioners agreed in that they did see any major issues related to the proposed
church.
The Commission and staff briefly discussed the issue involving the future dedication of
the roadway and the need to negotiate with the property owner to the south the remaining
right-of-way dedication. Chair Rotty asked if the issue could be addressed at the time of
platting. Schultz responded that it could.
.
MOTION by Johnson, second by Heman to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Heman, second by Larson to approve the conditional use
permit application to construct a church within an R-l zoning district contingent upon the
following:
1. The applicant plat the property within 90 days of approval of the CUP;
11. Any recommended changes based on the review of the Engineering Department;
111. Required changes addressed by the City's consulting Traffic Engineer Shelly
Johnson:
a. Need left and right turn lanes along Akin Road at the future public road;
b. Need a minimum of ISO-feet for the right turn lane onto Akin Road;
c. Proposed 24-foot street width is too narrow for a future public street;
d. Suggests painted crosswalks from parking lot to church entry, depressed curbs
for handicap accessibility;
e. One way drop off design or signage indicating one way.
APIF,MOTION CARRIED.
8. Chairman Rotty introduced the variance application from Farmington Lutheran Church to
exceed the maximum height by 12 feet - 8.5 inches with proposed church facility.
Planner Schultz presented the staff report. Schultz explained that the City recently
changed the maximum height requirements within the R-l district, reducing it from 45
.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
June 11, 2002
.
feet to 35 feet. Schultz added that the City Fire Marshall has reviewed the plans and
would support the variance based on the fact that church would be sprinkled and would
not be detrimental to public safety.
Rotty asked if there were any questions or comments from the applicant. Ms. Kuntz
noted to the Commission that a cross would be placed atop the steeple and if the variance
would address the cross. Schultz stated that staff did not view the cross as integral part of
the structure in need of the variance. The Commission agreed.
MOTION by Larson, second by Heman to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Johnson second by Barker to approve a variance of 12-feet-
8.5-inches to the maximum height of 35-feet within the R-l zoning district for the
construction of a church. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
9. Chairman Rotty introduced the proposed ordinance amendment to Section 10-6-18:
Shoreland Ordinance.
Planning Coordinator Smick gave a brief explanation for the purpose for the adoption of
the shoreland ordinance. Smick stated that staff requested Sherri Buss, from the City's
consulting engineering fIrm, to brief the Commission and explain some of the minor
revisions were made.
.
Sherri Buss, Bonestroos, Anderlink & Rosene Engineering, outlined the shoreland
ordinance for the Commission. Mrs. Buss stated that the Minnesota DNR is requesting
the adoption of the shoreland ordinance, adding that the city is one of the few
communities without such ordinance.
The Commission and staff discussed the content and purpose of the shoreland ordinance
and how it may affect existing and future development within the city. Mrs. Buss also
explained the DNR would need to review any variances relating to the shoreland
ordinance. The Commission asked that the language involving variance approval process
and high density PUD approval relating to impervious surfaces.
MOTION by Barker, second by Heman to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Larson, second by Heman to forward a recommendation of
approval to the City Council to adopt Section 10-6-18: Shoreland Ordinance contingent
upon clarifIcation of the two sections, as discussed, of the proposed ordinance. APIF,
MOTION CARRIED.
10. Chairman Rotty asked if the applicant Mr. Transue was present for the proposed
encroachment variance. He was not. Rotty suggested that the Commission continue the
public hearing to allow the applicant a chance to discuss the proposal.
MOTION by Barker, second by Johnson to continue the public hearing to the next
regular meeting. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
11.
Planner Schultz suggested discussing the issue involving the maximum lot coverage
within the Autumn Glen development. Schultz stated that a number of residents within
the Autumn Glen development were at or near the 25% maximum lot coverage within the
R -1 zoning district due to minimum home footprint requirements placed by the
.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
June 11, 2002
developer. Schultz stated that the Development Committee made several suggestions to
deal with the coverage guidelines within the R-l.
.
Mrs. Kramel, 4817 191,t Street, requested that the Commission consider a change in the
language or policy that would allow a greater percentage of lot coverage.
The Commission suggested staff review how lot calculation is applied to covered
structures (principal home, garage, 3-season porch, etc) and if non-impervious type
structures, such as decks, could be eliminated as part of the coverage calculations.
Planner Schultz indicated that staff would review the possibility, reminding the
Commission that other zoning districts allow a greater percentage of coverage.
The Commission directed staff to review the possible changes concerning lot coverage
calculations and report back to the Commission.
12. Community Development Director Carroll introduced the proposed City Council
Resolution regarding processing of annexation petitions. Carroll stated that the proposed
resolution is a result of continued inquiries of annexation. Carroll stated that the intent of
the resolution was to clarify the handling of future annexation petitions.
The Commission and staff discussed the proposed language of the proposed resolution.
The Commission agreed that annexation policies should be addressed by the City Council
and that the Planning Commission should not be involved with policy changes.
13.
There being no further business the Commission agreed to adjourn.
Respectfully Submitted,
.
Michael Schultz
Associate Planner
Approved
'7- 9- 02-
.
.
Planning Commission
Minutes
Regular Meeting
July 9, 2002
1.
Chair Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
Members Present: Rotty, Larson, Barker, Johnson and Heman
Membersl\bsent:~one
.Also Present: Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; Lee Smick, Planning
Coordinator and Michael Schultz, l\ssociate Planner
Chairman Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
2. Chairman Rotty requested any comments on the l\pril 23, 2002 minutes as submitted.
There were none. MOTION by Barker, second by Johnson. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
3. Chairman Rotty requested any comments on the May 14, 2002 minutes as submitted.
There were none. MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
4. Chairman Rotty requested any comments on the June 11, 2002 minutes as submitted.
There were none. MOTION by Heman, second by Johnson. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
.
5.
Chairman Rotty introduced the continued public hearing for the applicant William
Transue for a setback variance to a proposed amateur radio tower.
l\ssociate Planner Schultz indicated that the applicant has submitted a letter withdrawing
his application for the setback variance for the proposed 45-foot amateur radio tower.
Schultz added that the applicant is proposed to construct a tower in the same location but
under the guidelines that require additional setback requirements according to the City
Code.
MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Larson, second by Heman to accept the applicant's letter of
withdrawal on the proposed variance. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
6.
Chairman Rotty introduced for public hearing the proposed amendments to the 2020
Comprehensive Plan and Rezone of the properties located at 213 8th Street, 301 Main
Street and 305 Main Street.
.
l\ssociate Planner Schultz stated that the proposed amendments would involve a
Comprehensive Plan amendment for the property located at 213 8th Street to be amended
from Institutional to the Low/Medium Density and rezoned from R-l (Low Density) to
R-2 (LowlMedium Residential). The proposal for the properties located at 301 and 305
Main Street would only need to be rezoned from R-2 (the previous zoning district) to R-T
(Residential Transition District), which would be consistent with the 2020
Comprehensive Plan.
Chairman Rotty asked if there were any questions from the public. There were none.
Rotty asked if there were any questions from the Commission. They had no questions.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
July 9, 2002
Rotty asked if single-family is permitted within the R-T District. Schultz replied that
they are.
.
MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Johnson, second by to Larson to forward a recommendation
of approval to the City Council to amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan for the property
located at 213 8th Street from Institutional to Low/Medium Density and also to rezone the
from R-l to R-2; also to rezone the properties located at 301 and 305 Main Street from R-
2 to R-T. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
7. Chairman Rotty introduced the public hearing for a Conditional Use Permit for grading
and mineral extraction for the applicant Friedges Landscaping, Inc.
Planning Coordinator Smick presented the staff report. Smick stated that the applicant is
seeking to continue mineral extraction on what is referred to as the Huber mining pit.
Smick stated that the original Conditional Use Permit for mining was voided because the
required cleanup of the property was not completed within one year as specified.
Planner Smick stated that the applicant is also seeking permission to be allowed to crush
concrete material on site but must be done within the requirements outlined by the state
MPCA controls and guidelines set within the staff report.
Chairman Rotty asked if Mr. Brennan, Friedges Landscaping, had anything to add to the
staff report. Mr. Brennan added that the Wurdeman pit is planned to be restored by
August and the Huber pit is planned on be restored by next August.
.
Chairman Rotty asked if there were any questions from the Commission. There were
none. Chairman Rotty asked if the City Council would be reviewing a reclamation plan
for the property. Planner Smick replied that a reclamation plan would be required of the
applicant.
MOTION by Barker, second by Johnson to forward a favorable recommendation to the
City Council for the Conditional Use Permit to allow mining and crushing to continue
within the Huber mining pit. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
8. Community Development Director Carroll introduced for discussion the proposal from a
potential hotel developer to possibly amend the Zoning Code to allow hotels within the I-
I (Light Industrial) Zoning District.
CDD Carroll informed the Commission that a developer for a hotel chain is inquiring
interest to amend the Zoning Code to be allowed to construct a hotel on a 2-acre lot
located along C.S.A.H. 50 and Eaton Ave. CDD Carroll expressed the interest of the
HRA to attract a hotel in town, but not necessarily within the Industrial Park. CDD
Carroll presents the "pros & cons" to allowing a hotel use within the Industrial Park
zoning district. A sketch site plan was presented demonstrating the hotel in the rear of
the lot.
Commissioner Rotty requested comments from the Commission.
Commissioner Johnson stated that if the tenants in the Industrial Park were clamoring for
a hotel for customers maybe he would have a different opinion; but allowing a hotel in
.
2
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
July 9,2002
the Industrial Park may bring on the need to add a restaurant to the same location. There
are other locations in town that would be more appropriate.
Commissioner Larson agreed, there are other locations, possibly on the south side of
C.S.A.H. 50 when the city completes evaluating the future business park.
Commissioner Barker and Heman agreed with the other Commissioners, adding that a
hotel is greatly desired in town but not at the expense of locating it within the Industrial
Park.
Chairman Rotty agreed with all of the statements of the Commissioners. Chairman Rotty
added that he hopes this would detract the developer to reviewing other possible
locations.
Community Development Director Carroll stated that he will forward the statements of
the Commission to the HRA and will continue to work with the developers to finding an
alternative location.
9.
Associate Planner Schultz presented a supplemental agenda item involving the maximum
lot coverage allowed within the R-l zoning district as discussed a previous Commission
meeting. Schultz stated that staff reviewed all alternatives and is recommending
increasing the maximum lot coverage from 25% to 30% lot coverage. Schultz stated that
the additional 5% increase would be appropriate and fair to not only the homeowners
within the R -1 district, but would fair within the other residential zoning districts.
Rotty clarified that the proposed increase of 5% in lot coverage would allow an additional
500 square feet in lot coverage. Schultz replied that estimate would be correct.
Chair Rotty asked if the residents of Autumn Glen had any comments toward the staff
recommendation. The Commission, staff and Lisa Kremmel (representing Autumn Glen
residents) discussed how the proposed increase would allow the additional coverage
necessary for proposed additions. The Commission agreed to staff's proposed increase
and directed staff to draft an ordinance to be brought back to the Commission.
10. Chairman Rotty asked ifthere were any additional items to discuss. There were none.
The Commission agreed to adjourn at this time.
Respectfully Submitted,
Approved
Michael Schultz
Associate Planner
3
.
Planning Commission
Minutes
Special Meeting
July 23, 2002
1.
Chair Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
Members Present: Rotty, Larson, Barker and Johnson
Members Absent: Heman
Also Present: Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; Lee Smick, Planning
Coordinator and Michael Schultz, Associate Planner
Chairperson Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
2. Chairperson Rotty introduced the variance application from Jeff and Barb Kubat, 5441
193rd Street W., to encroach seven feet into the minimum front yard setback with an
above ground pool.
Associate Planner Schultz presented the staff report. Schultz stated that the applicants do
suffer some hardship in that their lot was platted at (approximately) 108 feet in depth
with a 30-foot setback. Schultz suggested to the Commission that if the variance is
approved that a solid six-foot fence be added around the property to provide screening.
.
Chairman Rotty asked the applicants if they had anything to add. Mr. Kubat stated that
the layout of the property allows only one location for the pool. Mr. Kubat added that a
fence company has been contacted to construct a fence.
Chairman Rotty requested questions and comments from the Commission.
Commissioner Barker asked if any of the neighbors had any issues with the proposed
pool. Mr. Kubat replied that none of neighbors have any issues with the pool location.
Commissioner Johnson stated that the applicant appears hindered by two front yard
setbacks and that is the only logical location for a pool.
Chairman asked if there were any questions or comments from the Commission. There
were none.
MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Larson, second by Johnson to approve the variance to
encroach seven feet into the minimum 20-foot front yard setback contingent that the
property owner constructs a solid six-foot fence. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
3.
Chairman Rotty introduced the variance application from Controlled Air, 21210 Eaton
Ave, to encroach forty-feet into the minimum fifty-foot front yard setback with a
proposed pylon sign.
.
Associate Planner Schultz presented the staff report. Schultz stated that the applicant is
seeking a variance for the proposed 9.5-foot sign because of the existing location of its
building and utility easement for the overhead power lines. Planner Schultz indicated
that the property currently contains two freestanding signs, one of which did not receive
permit approval and is considered illegal. Schultz suggested that both of the freestanding
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes
Special Meeting
July 23,2002
signs be removed and a signage plan be submitted for review if the Commission approves
the variance to allow the placement of the pylon sign.
Chairman Rotty asked if the applicant had any additional comments to the staff report.
Geoff Pettis, Controlled Air, stated that they would remove the sign to the east and place
the proposed pylon sign in that location.
Rotty asked if there were any questions from the Commission. There were none. Rotty
noted to staff to try and incorporate language in the new sign ordinance to relieve the
setback requirements for pylon signs.
MOTION by Barker, second by Johnson to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Larson, second by Barker to approve the forty-foot
encroachment contingent:
i. Both existing freestanding signs be removed to be replaced with the proposed
pylon sign (to a maximum of 150 square feet);
ii. The property owner submits a signage plan to be reviewed and approved by staff.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
4.
Chairperson Rotty introduced for public hearing the conditional use permit application
from Farmington Development Corporation to construct 12 townhome units within the R-
T (Downtown Transitional) zoning district. Rotty explained the process of the public
hearing and the other three relevant public hearings for the proposed development.
Planning Coordinator Smick presented the staff report. Smick presented the existing
zoning and comprehensive land use plan; Smick noted that the applicant would also need
to amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan because it identifies the property as Public/Semi-
public (scheduled for a July 30 public hearing date). Planner Smick briefly discussed the
issues relating to the two proposed variances. Smick presented the complete report.
Chairperson Rotty stated that the Heritage Preservation Commission has requested to
present a statement concerning its review of the proposed project.
Sue Strachan, Heritage Preservation Commission Chair, and Tim Rice, HPC, read a
prepared statement concerning its review of the project. HPC chairperson Strachan stated
that the HPC is unanimously requesting the Planning Commission consider denial of the
proposed development citing at least four of the requirements to be met for Conditional
Use Permit approval.
Chairperson Rotty briefly explained the conditional use permit process to the public.
Rotty reminded the public that it wasn't the responsibility of the Commission to decide if
the church should be preserved but only to review and forward recommendations
involving the proposed development.
Rotty asked if there were any questions or comments from the public.
George Flynn, 320 Walnut St., presented a written statement (summarized) requesting
the Commission to consider the historic integrity of the neighborhood in relation to the
proposed development. Mr. Flynn stated that design of the townhomes does not
harmonize with the rest of the older homes in the area. Mr. Flynn stated that the
townhomes, if approved, would have a dramatic impact to the whole downtown.
2
.
Planning Commission Minutes
Special Meeting
July 23, 2002
Audrey Rademacher, 312 5th St., stated that she felt the townhomes would blend into
the neighborhood citing that some of the homes shown (by Mr. Flynn) were constructed
in the fifties and sixties. The resident added that the townhomes would also fill the need
for one level living for seniors.
Loren Schulz, 500 Spruce St., stated that the HPC and Mr. Flynn described well the
"charm" of the downtown area and that the proposed development would not be
compatible.
Alice Blaha, 15 Spruce St., stated that the HPC should have purchased the property if
they were concerned about how the development would fit into the neighborhood.
Ann Manthey, 104 Spruce Street, stated that she would normally fight for affordable
housing in the community but feels that the church adds more value to the community
than would the proposed development.
Renee Auge, 409 Spruce St., commented that the proposed townhomes are more
suburban in design and would fit in within the north end of town. The resident
demonstrated pictures of a multi-family project in Northfield that added architectural
elements that blended into the existing neighborhood.
Kris Akin, 302 Oak St., stated that a mix of housing is needed for the city and especially
in the downtown area, especially for seniors. She added that many of the elderly
residents that live near the downtown also shop downtown.
.
Earl Teporten, 521 Oak St., commented that the home that they purchased several years
ago was dilapidated but invested their time and money into renovating the home but
figuring only if the rest of the neighborhood would experience the same reinvestment.
Mr. Teporten presented some property value figures involving a property located to the
west of the Oak Place townhomes. Mr. Teporten stated that the property had gone down
in value when compared with recent home values.
Commission members argued that other factors could have been involved with the
decreased value of the home and not related to the construction of the adjacent
townhomes. Mr. Teporten agreed that he did not have the full details on why the home
may have lost value.
Lynn Royce, address?, stated that she is most disappointed about the misinformation
given to the residents concerning the project. She stated that she has invested a lot into
her property and feels that the argument in the possible lose in property value is a viable
argument that can be studied. She asked if anybody has asked the developer to consider
changing the fa9ade of the townhomes to help blend them in better with the
neighborhood.
Jackie Dooley, 313 Walnut St., stated that the Commission should be considering the
architecture and style of the townhomes and determining if they meet the rhythm of the
neighborhood.
.
Arlene Snyder, 408 Walnut St., commented that she appreciates her neighborhood and
various types of uses. Stated that the addition of the townhomes would only add to the
character of the neighborhood.
3
.
Planning Commission Minutes
Special Meeting
July 23, 2002
Glenda Dye, 600 Spruce St., stated that she moved from Texas and was drawn to the
historic nature of downtown Farmington. She is not opposed to the need for senior
housing but desired that the proposed housing blend with the character of the
neighborhood. She added that if these (townhomes) are approved she might consider
moving to a city that values the historic nature of its city.
Earl Teporten, 521 Oak St., asked the Commission if it was feasible for the HPC to
interface with the developer to discuss possible alternatives that would satisfy all parties.
Chair Rotty asked City Attorney Poehler if the Commission could be legally require the
developer to meet with the HPC. Attorney Poehler responded that they could not.
Sheri Speckman, 708 5th St., stated that she had choose the area very carefully and
would make her "sick" to think the area could change into something different than what
they had choose only a year ago.
Chair Rotty asked why residents were concerned that the neighborhood would change
with the construction of the townhomes.
Jackie Dooley stated that many residents are concerned because the proposed
development is a suburban style development and that it may be the start of the
integration of suburban style into the downtown. The new style homes are "devoid" of
the character of older historic homes.
.
Chair Rotty asked staff if the proposed use was permitted, single-family or townhome,
would the Commission have any opportunity to comment on the appearance of buildings.
Community Development Director Carroll replied that staff would not but that the
development would still possibly be required to go through a platting process.
Lynn Royce replied that that comment comes across as a threat. She added that the last
several residents only have stated that there is a sense of pride in the neighborhood and
are only asking that the developer consider a compromise of adding some character to the
buildings.
Chair Rotty replied that he was only asking for clarification and did not intend for the
comment to be taken as a threat. Rotty explained that the Commission is only looking
out for the best interest of the community.
Verne Dye, 600 Spruce St., asked what the size and cost of the units would be.
Planning Coordinator Smick stated that each unit would be 1,960 sq. ft. and would be
sold between $180 to $190,000.
Earl Teporten, 521 Oak St., reiterated the guidelines that appear to getting "glazed"
over and would be in violation of the City ordinance. The resident added that the core
historic nature of the city is being threatened.
Chair Rotty asked the developer if he would like to make any additional comments.
.
Colin Garvey, Farmington Development Corporation, stated that the townhomes that are
proposed would blend in with what he considers a mix of housing types; single and two
4
.
Planning Commission Minutes
Special Meeting
July 23, 2002
level, apartments and churches. Mr. Garvey stated that he has not been invited to any
HPC meeting to discuss the design of the townhomes and feels they are asking a little too
late. He added that the housing is needed within walking distance of downtown and is
targeted for seniors 55 and over.
Chairperson Rotty asked if there were any immediate questions to the developer. They
had none at the moment. Rotty asked if there were any new comments not addressed by
the public.
Earl Teporten stated that being a member of the HPC he apologizes for not inviting the
developer from day one, but doesn't feel it's too late to sit down to consider a
compromise.
Rotty asked if there were any additional comments from the public. There were none.
Chair Rotty asked if the Commission had any clarifying questions at this time. The
Commission did not. Rotty suggested that the Commission consider tabling the
development to allow the Commission members to consider all of the public testimony.
Rotty asked what time frame the Commission had concerning a decision on the permit.
CDD Carroll asked what, if any, additional information the Commission may what to
consider during the interim until the next meeting.
.
The Commission asked for number of additional items and information that would help
the Commission understand the true meaning of historical preservation and additional the
specifics of the requests of the HPC concerning the townhome design.
City Attorney Poehler asked that if the HPC would forward any comments concerning
the design of the townhomes, that they (HPC) frame them within the requirements of the
conditional use permit.
Rotty asked the developer if he was acceptable to meeting with the HPC. Mr. Garvey
stated that any delay would involve a financial burden but would be willing to meet.
Rotty asked Mrs. Strachan if the HPC would be willing to meet with the developer. Mrs.
Starched responded that they would. Rotty suggested that the meeting be continued to no
later than the first meeting in August.
Commissioner Larson asked what method the HPC would use to considering the typical
style of home in the area when such a mix of age and style of home exists. Tim Rice,
HPC, replied that since the HPC are not qualified architects and may not be able to
specify a particular design. Sue Strachan added that they could only work with the
language of ordinance, the same as the Commission.
Chair Rotty asked the Commission to consider
MOTION by Johnson, second by Larson to continue items 2c, 2d, 2e and 2f on the
agenda to the regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting in August. APIF,
MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Johnson, second by to Larson. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
.
5
.
.
.
5.
Planning Commission Minutes
Special Meeting
July 23, 2002
Planning Chairman Rotty introduced the proposed ordinance amendment to Section 10-5-
6 (B) to increase the maximum lot coverage within the R-l (Low Density) district from
25% to 30%.
Associate Planner Schultz presented the staff report. Schultz indicated that the proposed
ordinance amendment stemmed from discussion from Autumn Glen residents concerned
the City's lot coverage standards and could be restricted to future additions to their
homes.
Chairperson Rotty asked if there were any questions from the public.
Jason Meckels, MNDNR, stated that the DNR has been working at preserving the
Vermillion Rive and its tributaries as trout streams. Mr. Meckels stated that the DNR
have been working toward finding ways to reduce the amount of impervious surface and
any decision to increase the amount of impervious surface could impact the trout streams.
Chair Rotty asked if the DNR considered decks as impervious surface. Rotty added that
he feels that the city attempts to preserve any natural area when considering a
development. Planner Smick reminded Mr. Meckels and the Commission of the city's
recent adoption of a shoreland ordinance. Planner Schultz clarified that the city currently
does not control the total amount of impervious surface only that of the home and any
accessory structures.
Chair Rotty asked if there were any questions or comments from the Commission. The
Commission was in agreement that the amendment would not only help the residents
within the Autumn Glen subdivision but also equalize the maximum coverage within
each residential zoning district.
MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker to forward a recommendation of
approval to the City Council amending Section 10-5-6 (B) Lot Coverage, increasing the
maximum from 25% to 30% within the R-l (Low Density) zoning district. APIF,
MOTION CARRIED.
6. Chairman Rotty asked if there were any additional items to discuss. There were none.
The Commission agreed to adjourn at this time.
Approved
g)3/02-
I I
Respectfully Submitted,
Michael Schultz
Associate Planner
6
"'.. t ~.~
Special Planning Commission Meeting - July 23, 2002
Resident Name Please Print
npolcrt~
~ ~(0
v\.
Address
S21 0 K- >1
\\. )/
::5 d-<J
1,
, ,
C.
~kr "I," k. )I~
Special Planning Commission Meeting - July 23, 2002
-I "- C(
.
Planning Commission
Minutes
Regular Meeting
August 13, 2002
1.
Chair Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
Members Present: Rotty, Larson, Barker, Johnson and Heman
Members Absent: None
Also Present: Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; Lee Smick, Planning
Coordinator and Michael Schultz, Associate Planner
Chairman Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
2. Chairman Rotty requested any comments on the July 9, 2002 minutes as submitted.
There were none. MOTION by Larson, second by Johnson. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
Chairman Rotty opened all scheduled public hearings. Rotty explained that the Commission
would begin with item 3b (the continued public hearing for the St. Michael's Place CUP).
3.
Chairman Rotty introduced the continued public hearing for Farmington Development
Corporation seeking conditional use permit approval to construct twelve townhouse units
within the R-T (Downtown Transitional) zoning district.
.
Planning Coordinator Smick presented the staff report.
Chair Rotty stated that the Commission would hear any new public comments and
requested that they be limited to 15 minutes.
Blanch Rychert, 113 Oak St., stated that she is current owner of one of the Oak Place
townhomes and expressed that the one-level townhomes are needed within the
community and would fit into the area proposed because of the mix of housing types.
Tim Dougherty, 517 Spruce St., asked if the Commission had an opportunity to review
the goals as stated by the City Council (at a Council workshop session). Chair Rotty
replied that he did not receive a copy and did not have the opportunity to review them.
Mr. Dougherty strongly urged the Commission to review those goals before making a
decision (on the CUP).
Mr. Dougherty added that the City has set precedence in setting architectural standards in
the Park Place development and that the Commission should consider instituting the same
standards within a project proposed in the city's downtown.
Chair Rotty replied that if they were just adopted by the City Council the Commission
has not had an opportunity to review them. Mr. Dougherty presented a copy of the goals
adopted by the City Council.
.
Chair Rotty and Mr. Dougherty discussed the background of the Park Place development;
Rotty explained that the project received assistance from the University of Minnesota
design team.
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
August 13, 2002
Chairman Rotty asked if there were any additional public comment. There were none.
Rotty asked the applicant if he had any comments to add to the staff report. He did not.
Chair Rotty asked the Commission if they had any questions or comments for staff or the
developer.
Commissioner Larson asked if the developer had met with the HPC and created any
changes to the design of the townhomes.
Colin Garvey replied that they are looking at putting on some dormers in between the
garages on the roofline, putting on shake siding on the gable ends and adding gable
pediments dressing them up as best they could.
MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Larson, second by to Johnson to approve the conditional use
permit to construct twelve townhouse units within the R-T zoning district contingent
upon approval of a Comprehensive Plan amendment from Public/Semi-public to Medium
Density Residential. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
4. Chairman Rotty introduced the application from Farmington Development Corporation to
amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan from Institutional to Medium Density Resident.
Planning Coordinator Smick presented the staff report.
Chair Rotty asked if there were any comments from the public. There were none. Rotty
asked if there were any questions from the Commission. The Commission agreed that
the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment would correct the recent change in zoning
of the half block when the new zoning districts and map was adopted.
MOTION by Barker, second by Heman to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker to accept the applicant's letter of
withdrawal on the proposed variance. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
5. Chairman Rotty introduced the continued public hearing for Farmington Development
Corporation for a variance approval to exclude three off-street parking stalls as part of the
proposed St. Michael's Place townhouse development.
Planning Coordinator Smick presented the staff report. Smick reported that the property
did not appear to meet any of the criteria that would necessitate a hardship.
Commissioner Larson stated that he believed the ordinance was adopted to establish
parking in townhome developments that contain narrow private streets and have limited
on-street parking. Larson added that this development would have on-street parking
within the public streets.
Rotty asked if there were any questions or comments from the pubic. There were none.
Rotty asked if there were any questions or comments from the Commission. The
Commission agreed with Commissioner Larson comments. Chairman Rotty stated that
the parking would take away from the green space of the development and cited the first
paragraph (as a hardship to the development).
2
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
August 13, 2002
MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Larson, second by Heman to approve the variance permit to
exclude the required three off-street parking stalls as part of the St. Michael's Place
townhouse development. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
6.
Chair Rotty introduced the continued public hearing for Farmington Development
Corporation who are seeking variance permit approval to exceed the maximum lot
coverage of35% by 3.43% (or 2,099 square feet).
Planner Smick presented the staff report. Smick reported that the property did not appear
to meet any of the criteria that would necessitate a hardship.
Chairman Rotty requested any questions or comments from the public. There were none.
The applicant, Colin Garvey, asked to respond to the staff report. Mr. Garvey stated that
he felt a hardship does exist. Mr. Garvey stated that the hardship is the project itself, they
are attempting to get in as many units on the property to meet the demand (for single-
level townhomes) of the community. The applicant felt that the 3% would be
unnoticeable. The applicant added that many of the townhome projects he's familiar with
the buildings are only twenty (20) feet from the curb while the proposed buildings (in this
project) are setback thirty (30) feet from the curb. The Commission should take into
consideration the boulevard area that would add to the green space. Mr. Garvey added
that they would be adding sidewalk to the 4th Street side of the project that currently does
not exist.
Chairman Rotty requested any questions or comments from the Commission.
Commissioner Larson stated that the 3.43% doesn't appear to be as much a factor for this
particular project and would favor the variance.
Commissioner Johnson stated that the findings in the staff report appeared open ended
and not actual findings of fact. Commissioner Johnson added that the additional
coverage does not appear to cause any determent to the neighborhood.
Commissioner Barker stated that he would agree with the other Commissioner and cited
regulations four and five as hardships relating to the proposed property and project.
Chairman Rotty stated that the 35% lot coverage seemed reasonable when the
Commission adopted the recent revisions to the Zoning Code. Rotty noted the large
amount of green space in the rear of the townhomes and would agree that a hardship
could exist in (regulation) number four, adding though that this is a questionable
vanance.
MOTION by Johnson, second by Heman to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Larson, second by Heman to approve the variance permit to
exceed the maximum lot coverage of 35% by 3.43% (or 2,099 square feet). APIF,
MOTION CARRIED.
7.
Chairman Rotty introduced the continued public hearing for the St. Michael's Place
Preliminary and Final Plat for the applicant, Farmington Development Corporation.
3
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
August 13,2002
Planning Coordinator Smick presented the staff report. Smick reported that staff is
requesting that the developer submit a landscape plan indicating the location of the
existing trees, trees to be preserved and the trees the developer proposes to replace.
Chair Rotty asked if there were any questions or comments from the public. There were
none. Rotty asked if there were any questions or comments from the Commission.
Commissioner Larson asked if staff had discussed the issue of adding two additional
boulevard trees. Smick replied that staff had not. Larson asked the developer if the two
additional trees would be a problem. The developer replied that it would not.
MOTION by Johnson, second by Larson to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Heman, second by Johnson to approve the St. Michael's
Place Preliminary and Final plat contingent upon the developer submitting a revised
landscape plan (with the required 18 boulevard trees). APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
Chairman Rotty requested to take a 5-minute intermission. The Commission agreed.
8. Planning Chair Rotty introduced the scheduled public hearing the special
exception/conditional use permit application to move a residential structure from 1020 8th
Street to 412 Main Street for the applicant Ivan Janssen.
Associate Planner Schultz presented the staff report.
Rotty asked if Mr. Halweg (representing the applicant) had anything to add to the report.
Mr. Halweg briefly described the applicant's plans for remodeling the exterior and
bringing the home up to the requirements of the state building code.
Chair Rotty asked Mr. Halweg if the applicant was acceptable to the contingencies listed
by staff. Mr. Halweg replied that none of the contingencies appear to be an issue other
than the seven days to complete backfill of the home, but shouldn't be a problem.
Chairman Rotty asked staff about the lot combination of the current location of the home
and the property to the south (K & K Auto Ranch). Schultz stated that it isn't absolutely
necessary only if the applicant proposes to make use of the garage (that is not part of the
move) plus the rezoning of the property. Schultz added that that issue could be dealt with
separately.
Chair Rotty asked if there were any questions or comments from the public. There were
none. Rotty asked if there were any questions or comments from the Commission.
Commissioner Larson commented that nine months seems to be a long time before
establishing grass and requested that that time be changed to one month
MOTION by Barker, second by Heman to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker to approve the special
exception/conditional use permit to move the residential structure from 1020 8th Street to
412 Main Street contingent upon the following:
4
.
.
.
1.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
August 13, 2002
The Interim City Building Official determines that the overall condition of the
structure is safe to be moved along public streets;
The applicant must submit and obtain approval of home remodeling plans that
would bring the structure up to the standards of the Minnesota Building Code
prior to the structure being moved;
The applicant must complete exterior work on the structure within 90 days of
moving the structure onto the property; landscaping and replacement of the
City's boulevard tree must be completed within 9 months of the structure being
moved to the site;
The applicant's movers must receive MNDOT approval of the moving of an
oversized load on the State's highway system;
The applicant must remove and backfill the former house foundation within 7
days of the house moving. The former site must also be graded and established
with grass seed within I month of moving the house.
11.
111.
IV.
v.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
9.
Planning Chair Rotty introduced the scheduled public hearing for the Emmaus Grove
Preliminary and Final plat for the applicant Farmington Lutheran Church.
Associate Planner Schultz presented the staff report. Schultz reported that staff is
recommending continuance of the plat as recommended by the City's wetland consultant
and from the response from the Dakota County Soil and Water (DCSW); both citing the
lack of an approved wetland impact application. Schultz stated that the DCSW was
recommending delaying any action on the preliminary plat that would give the applicant
the authority to continue on with a final plat.
Chairman Rotty stated that the lack of wetland impact permit is significant enough for the
Commission to consider delaying the decision of the plat. Schultz indicated that the
permitting process could take 60 to 90 days.
City Attorney Brokl responded that a time sensItIve date be established unless the
developer is acceptable to a waiver of the time frame in which plats must be acted upon.
Schultz indicated that staff would send out a letter requesting a waiver. Attorney Broid
stated that a specific date would not need to be established.
MOTION by Rotty, second by Johnson to continue the public hearing to allow the
developer time to complete the wetland impact application. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
10.
Community Development Director Carroll presented for discussion issues associated
with the Metropolitan Council's Opportunity Grant and the city's proposed study of the
Spruce Street corridor. Mr. Carroll explained that the amount of time needed to complete
a detailed study involving market study, transportation, land use, environmental, etc. may
take an extensive amount of time.
CDD Carroll reported that staff is inquiring with the Planning Commission and also with
the City Council the thought of implementing short term land use controls in the form of
an 18-month moratorium. Carroll explained that the moratorium could be lifted sooner if
the study were completed sooner. Carroll stated that the HRA was supportive of an 18-
month moratorium.
5
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
August 13, 2002
.
Chairman Rotty would support the proposed moratorium if it would allow time for the
study to be completed.
Commissioner Larson asked if 18-months was too long or too short to complete the
study. CDD Carroll responded that the 18-months was estimated and anticipated that the
study could be completed sooner, allowing the city to lift the moratorium.
Rotty requested a motion in support of the moratorium.
MOTION by Larson, second by Johnson to support staff recommendation of an 18-
month moratorium in the area of the proposed Spruce Street corridor. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
II. Community Development Director Carroll briefly informed the Commission that the
MET Council is requesting to give a presentation to the Planning Commission and City
Council for project NEMO (Non-point Education for Municipal Officials). The project
deals with how land use decisions affect local and regional storm water systems. The
Commission was agreeable to a joint meeting with the City Council for the presentation.
12. Chairman Rotty asked if there were any additional items to discuss. There were none.
The Commission agreed to adjourn at this time.
.
Approved
q h /02-
/ I
Respectfully Submitted,
Michael Schultz
Associate Planner
.
6
.
Planning Commission
Minutes
Regular Meeting
September 9, 2002
1.
Chair Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
Members Present: Rotty, Larson, and Barker
Members Absent: Heman and Johnson
Also Present: Lee Smick, Planning Coordinator, Michael Schultz, Associate Planner, and
Matt Brokl, City Attorney
Chairman Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
2. Chairman Rotty requested any comments on the July 23, 2002 minutes as submitted.
There were none. MOTION by Larson, second by Barker. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
3. Chairman Rotty requested any comments on the August 13,2002 minutes as submitted.
There were none. MOTION by Barker, second by Larson. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
Chairman Rotty opened all scheduled public hearings.
4.
Chairman Rotty introduced the public hearing for the addition of a Bed and Breakfast
code.
.
Associate Planner Schultz presented the staff report. Schultz presented the proposal for a
Bed and Breakfast code because there has been interest in operating one at 520 Oak
Street. The suggested several reasons for allowing bend and breakfast establishments
including the choice of lodging in the City, upgrading of historically significant homes
through financial opportunities, maintaining the "small town" atmosphere, and the ability
for the City to control the number of bed and breakfast establishments in the City. Bed
and breakfast establishments would be limited to historically significant homes and
would be located within the R-I, R-2, R- T, and R-D zoning districts.
There were no comments by the public. Commissioner Barker noted that the ordinance
should read "one off-street parking space for each unit and one off-street parking space
for the manager." He also asked if the Planning Commission would have the authority to
terminate the operations. Associate Planner Schultz stated that the permit was for a
Conditional Use and therefore, the Planning Commission reviews any operations
concerning the Conditional Use.
Commissioner Larson asked if a schematic plan was submitted by the potential buyer at
520 Oak Street. Associate Planner Schultz stated that the potential buyer was outbid at
the last moment, but the buyer is looking at other sites in the City. Commissioner Larson
also asked if the off-street parking lot is counted towards the lot coverage calculation.
Associate Planner Schultz explained that it would not because parking lots and patios are
not part of the lot coverage calculation.
.
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
September 9,2002
Chairman Rotty stated that the bed and breakfast issue should be placed on the agenda for
the Joint Planning Commission/City Council meeting on September 18, 2002 to
determine the City Council's opinion on the subject.
MOTION by Barker, second by Larson to continue the public hearing to the next regular
meeting to allow further discussion on the topic at the September 18, 2002 Joint
Workshop. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
5. Chairman Rotty introduced the public hearing revising the Erosion Control and Turf
Establishment ordinance.
Planning Coordinator Smick presented the staff report stating that there were
inconsistencies between the code and current City procedures. Smick stated that the City
no longer requires sod to be placed before a final certificate of occupancy is approved
and does not require sod installation on or before July 1 st. Smick suggested that the code
should be revised to require the builder/homeowner to install sod 45 days after the as-
built is approved.
Commissioner Larson asked if the builder/homeowner was required to maintain the silt
fence during the period between approval of the as-built and the sod being installed.
Planning Coordinator Smick stated that the builder/homeowner was required to maintain
the silt fence until the sod was installed. Commissioner Larson suggested that the
ordinance should be reviewed after the City meets about Project NEMO at the September
18, 2002.
MOTION by Larson, second by Barker to table the public hearing to the October 8, 2002
meeting to allow the Planning Commission to attend the September 18, 2002 Joint
Workshop APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
6.
Chairman Rotty introduced the public hearing revising the Demolition ordinance.
Planning Coordinator Smick presented the staff report. Smick stated that revisions
include the addition of provisions from the Uniform Fire Code that deal with demolitions,
the addition of exemptions to the Minnesota State Building Code, the requirement that
the applicant notify the MPCA and the Minnesota Department of Health concerning a
demolition, and the addition that the City's Building Official determine the fencing
required at a demolition site.
Commissioner Larson stated a six-foot high security fence would be sufficient. Attorney
Brokl stated that a separate variance would not be required if a security fence of eight-
feet in height were proposed because it is a temporary situation. Chairman Rotty asked if
there was public comment. There was none.
Chairman Rotty stated that the City would be referencing statewide codes which would
simplify the demolition process.
MOTION by Larson, second by Barker to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Barker, second by Larson to approve the revisions to Section
4-6-1, Section 4-6-2, Section 4-6-3 (C) subd. 4, and Section 4-6-3 (C) subd. 8. APIF,
MOTION CARRIED.
2
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
September 9,2002
.
7.
Chair Rotty introduced the discussion concerning the Middle Creek East Final Plat.
Planning Coordinator Smick presented the staff report. Smick stated that the Middle
Creek East Final Plat consisted of 72 townhome lots and 14 outlots. Smick stated that
203rd Street would be built to City standards at 38 feet. Discussions concerning the
McCarthy house are continuing. Smick stated that there were contingencies to the final
plat approval including the requirement that 203rd Street be constructed in accordance
with City standards, a mutually agreed upon settlement is reached concerning the
McCarthy house, minor engineering issues are addressed, and an execution of the
development contract be performed.
Mr. Greg Munson, attorney for Arcon Development and DR Horton, stated that he would
like the contingency to be revised to state that 203rd would be constructed as directed by
the City Engineer, which would allow for flexibility of the road design. Attorney Brokl
stated that that request was acceptable.
Commissioner Larson was pleased that a settlement with McCarthy was pending. Don
Patton, DR Horton, stated that the project would be a valuable addition to the housing for
the City.
MOTION by Lars~n, second by Barker to approve the Middle Creek East Final Plat with
the four contingencies as follows:
.
1. Constructing 203rd Street as determined by the City Engineer.
2. A mutually agreed upon settlement is reached concerning the McCarthy
house/easement.
3. Minor engineering issues need to be addressed and approval of construction plans for
grading, storm water and utilities by the Engineering Division needs to be granted.
4. Execution of a Development Contract between the Developer and the City of
Farmington and submission of security, payment of all fees and costs and submission of
all other documents required under the Development Contract.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
8. Chairman Rotty requested that Middle Creek 5th Addition and Middle Creek 6th Addition
be combined as one discussion item.
Planning Coordinator Smick presented the staff report. Smick reported Middle Creek 5th
Addition consists of 33 single-family lots and Middle Creek 6th Addition consists of 10
single-family lots. Smick stated that a 25-foot wetland buffer is included within the lots
that back up to the DNR Protect wetland in the 5th Addition with another 50 feet beyond
the property lines totaling to a 75-foot wetland buffer. Smick stated that cul-de-sacs in
the 5th and 6th Additions require a sidewalk on one side of the road. Smick stated that the
sidewalk in the 6th Addition needs to be connected in the 1 st Addition.
.
3
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
September 9, 2002
.
Colin Roetman, DR Horton, stated that a sidewalk would be installed on the north side of
the 6th Addition within the cul-de-sac and connect within the 1 st Addition. Commissioner
Larson asked the Developers what type of time line they would propose. Larry Frank,
Arcon Development, stated that the grading would be done in the fall with the possibility
of road installation in the spring.
MOTION by Larson, second by Barker to make a positive recommendation to the City
Council approving the Middle Creek 5th Addition contingent upon the following:
1. A sidewalk is required on one side of the 28-foot wide cul-de-sac road to meet City
standards.
2. Minor engineering issues need to be addressed and approval of construction plans for
grading, storm water and utilities by the Engineering Division needs to be granted.
3. Execution of a Development Contract between the Developer and the City of
Farmington and submission of security, payment of all fees and costs and submission
of all other documents required under the Development Contract.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION by Larson, second by Barker to make a positive recommendation to the City
Council approving the Middle Creek 6th Addition contingent upon the following:
.
1. A sidewalk be placed on the north side of the cul-de-sac and connect with a sidewalk
in the 1 st Addition.
2. Minor engineering issues need to be addressed and approval of construction plans for
grading, storm water and utilities by the Engineering Division needs to be granted.
3. Execution of a Development Contract between the Developer and the City of
Farmington and submission of security, payment of all fees and costs and submission
of all other documents required under the Development Contract.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
9. Planning Chair Rotty introduced the discussion concerning the Middle Creek 7th Addition
Final Plat.
Associate Planner Schultz presented the staff report. Schultz reported that the gasline
easement is shown over a portion of the parking lots in the 7th Addition. Schultz stated
that Northern Natural Gas is reviewing the issue.
.
Don Patton, DR Horton, stated that he is working with Northern Natural Gas to discuss
an encroachment agreement between the two parties. Keith Willenbring, Engineer for
DR Horton, stated that Northern Natural Gas is preparing an easement agreement to
allow the parking lot encroachment. He stated that the association would be required to
replace any pavement that was removed if the gas company needed to repair anything
within the easement.
4
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
September 9, 2002
Chairman Rotty asked Don Patton what his timeline was on the project. Don Patton
stated he would like to extend 206th Street with Middle Creek East as soon as possible to
allow access for both projects.
Chairman Rotty requested that staff not bring the 7th Addition to the City Council until
the encroachment agreement from Northern Natural Gas was completed.
MOTION by Barker, second by Larson to make a positive recommendation to the City
Council approving the Middle Creek 7th Addition Final Plat. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED
10. Chairman Rotty introduced the discussion concerning a variance request for a twin home
in the R-3 zoning district.
Planning Coordinator Smick presented the staff report. Smick reported that twin homes
are not an allowable use in the R-3 district and therefore, a variance would be required.
Tim Giles, TC Construction has made the request to determine if the Planning
Commission would be in favor of a variance to allow twin homes in the R-3 district.
Chairman Rotty stated that he would be in favor of a variance to allow a twin home in the
Glenview Townhomes project that is zoned R-3 district. The Planning Commissioners
agreed.
Chairman Rotty directed staff to revise the R-3 permitted uses to allow twin homes.
11.
Chairman Rotty introduced the discussion concerning an extension to the CUP for
Farmington Lutheran Church.
Associate Planner Schultz presented the staff report. Schultz reported that Farmington
Lutheran Church was required to plat their property within 90 days upon approval of the
CUP on June 11, 2002. Schultz suggested that the property should be platted within the
one-year timeframe typically allowed for the CUP process. This would require the
property to be platted by June 11,2003. Schultz reported that the church needs to prepare
a wetland mitigation plan and therefore, needed to extend the CUP deadline.
MOTION by Barker, second by Larson to extend the CUP deadline to plat the property
by June 11,2003. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
12. Planning Coordinator Smick stated that a Joint Planning Commission/City Council
Workshop would be held on September 18,2002. Smick stated that Project NEMO, the
Trunk Highway 3 access study, and the bed and breakfast issue are on the agenda.
Approved
/0/6/02-
I I
Respectfully Submitted,
Lee Smick, AICP
Planning Coordinator
5
.
.
.
Planning Commission
Minutes
Regular Meeting
October S, 2002
1.
Call to Order
Chair Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Members Present: Rotty, Barker, Heman, Johnson, Larson
Members Absent: None
Also Present: Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; Lee Smick, City
Planner
2.
Approval of Minutes
MOTION by Barker, second by Larson to approve the September 9,2002 minutes.
Voting for: Rotty, Barker, Larson. Abstain: Heman, Johnson. MOTION CARRIED.
4.
Discussion
a) Possible Revision(s) of City Code Provisions Regarding Fence Height
(This item was moved forward to accommodate the audience).
Staff received a complaint regarding a neighbor's fence height exceeding 6 ft.
Staff sent a letter to the fence owner that the fence did not comply with city code.
The owner stated the fence was constructed of pre-assembled fence panels. When
the fence was installed, it was raised off the ground to provide room for trimming
and drainage. Topography was also an issue, as the owner wanted the top of the
fence to be even. Staff brought the issue to the Planning Commission to obtain
and opinion if the code should be changed to read 6 ft 6 inches to allow for some
latitude. Staff also asked how fence height should be determined. According to
the UBC it is from the ground to the top of the fence.
The commission suggested leaving the height at 6 ft. with a grace area of
topography. They felt fence height should be defined from the top of the fence to
the bottom, allowing for some space under the fence. It was suggested to defer to
staffs judgement when issuing the permit. The commission authorized staff to
research other cities.
3. Public Hearings
a) Conditional Use Permit Application - Construction of Accessory Apartment
within R-2 (Low/Medium Density) Zoning District - SOO Stb Street
The owner of 800 8th Street proposed an addition to his home. The addition
consists of 1800 sq. ft. and the existing home is 1500 sq. ft. Therefore, the
addition is not subordinate to the principal use and is considered a duplex. A
duplex is a permitted use under the R-2 zoning district and does not require a
public hearing. MOTION by Barker, second by Larson acknowledging the
conditional use requirement has been withdrawn and to close the public hearing.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
b)
Ordinance Amending 114-5(J) and 11-4-5(K) of the Farmington Zoning
Code - Erosion Control and Turf Establishment - Continued
The city no longer requires sod be in place before a final Certificate of Occupancy
is approved. The city also no longer issues temporary C.Oo's for issues
concerning sod installation. The requirement to complete sod installation prior to
July 1 has been omitted.
Planing Commission Regular Minutes
October 8, 2002
Page 2
The requirement for builderslhomeowners to install sod 45 days after the as-built .
is approved is an addition to the turf establishment requirements. During the
months of November - March weather conditions will be taken into account, and
require sod installation be done in the spring. MOTION by Barker, second by
Johnson to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION
by Johnson, second by Barker approving the amendments to the erosion control
and turf establishment ordinance and forwarding it to the City Council. APIF,
MOTION CARRIED.
4.
Discussion
b) Metropolitan Council's 2030 Blueprint
Staff presented the Metropolitan Council's 2030 Blueprint goals. The last date for
comments regarding the blueprint is October 30, 2002. According to the city's
2020 comp plan, ag preserve is part of the urban reserve. The Met Council
proposed ag preserve areas remain ag preserve until 2030. Staff is reviewing this
with the Met Council and will be meeting with landowners. Farmington is the
only community having ag preserve within the city boundaries. If the owners
want to keep their land as ag preserve, the commission has no problem with that.
The Met Council's concerns listed in the 2030 blueprint include the rising cost of
housing, an increase in highway congestion, and loss of farmland and natural
areas. The goals of the 2030 blueprint are more attention to pattern and
arrangement of land uses, and that transportation be used to shape land use
patterns.
.
A requirement for MUSA is that all MUSA be contiguous to other MUSA areas.
The Met Council is now looking at corridors. They propose MUSA follow
transportation lines to other rural growth centers. The 2030 blueprint proposes a
sewer interceptor down to Elko/New Market. Lakeville is having difficulty
because Elko will be sharing the Empire Treatment Plant capacity.
Another goal ofthe 2030 blueprint is the Met Council wants a re-investment in
older areas. They also want to make sure development is sensitive to the
environment. Staff will be responding to the Met Council and will provide a copy
of the response to the Planning Commission.
5. Adjourn
MOTION by Johnson, second by Heman to adjourn. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
Respectfully submitted,
c;fJ~~;)u-e~) a0 /~ d<oQX
{!./. :/L /~?
T'-" ~~e~ ;;r-v7 dezJ
Cynthia Muller
Executive Assistant
.
.
.
.
Planning Commission
Minutes
Regular Meeting
November 12, 2002
1.
Chair Rotty called the meeting to order at 7 :00 p.m.
Members Present: Rotty, Barker, Heman, Johnson, Larson
Members Absent: None
Also Present: Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; Jim Atkinson,
Assistant City Planner
2.
Community Development Director Carroll introduced Jim Atkinson as the new Assistant
City Planner.
3.
Public Hearings
Chairman Rotty opened all scheduled public hearings.
a) Consider Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Business Park to
Commercial and Zoning Map Amendment from BP to SSC and P/OS -
Knutsen Property
The property consists of approximately 60 acres and is located at the southwest corner of
the intersection ofCSAH 50 and Denmark Avenue. The Comprehensive Plan and
Zoning Map Amendments are needed to prepare the property for future commercial
development. The council placed a moratorium on development for a large portion of the
area, however, the Knutsen property was not included in the moratorium. The property
owner has expressed an interest in moving forward with development of the property.
Staff suggested 37 acres on the west side designated as Business Park be changed to
Spruce Street Commercial. The remaining 23 acres on the east side should be designated
as Parks/Open Space. A small portion in the northeast corner which contains gas line
easements should also be designated as Environmentally Sensitive.
Regarding the area containing the gas lines and wetlands, Commissioner Larson stated it
was called an environmentally sensitive area. What is the change? Staff stated the
environmentally sensitive designation is in the comprehensive guide plan and the
parks/open space designation is a zoning classification. Many environmentally sensitive
areas receive the parks/open space designation. Chairman Rotty stated during the
rezoning many conservation districts were rezoned to parks/open space for consistency.
Commissioner Johnson asked if the 6-8 acres not in the park would be grandfathered into
the business park ifnot in the flood plain? Staff stated the commission could recommend
to the Council that staff recommendations be put into place, or the commission could
recommend staff examine this issue, try to clarify it, and then staff could provide the City
Council with more information. Another option would be to continue the hearing to the
next Planning Commission meeting to have time to obtain more information about the
Regular Planning Commission Minutes
November 12, 2002
Page 2
area and whether it should stay park/open space or be included the Spruce Street corridor. .
After that meeting, it could be taken to the City Council.
Commissioner Johnson asked ifthe piece is sold, will it be tied into the business park?
Staff believes the straight through connection is very important. At some point the road
will go all the way through. Chairman Rotty then invited Mr. Matt Alexander to present
their preliminary plans.
Mr. Matt Alexander, New Century Development, is the developer for the Knutsen
property. Regarding the area to the west of the pipeline, when the City took the wetland
as overflow, it pulled a lot of the floodplain away. They are having a wetland mitigation
study done now. A site survey was done showing the total property to be 62 acres.
Everything west of the pipeline easement totals to 46.8 acres. Mr. Alexander stated the
difference from staff's recommendation of 37 acres to 46.8 is just under 10 acres
difference. This is very valuable for the Spruce Street commercial area. He would like to
see more study done on this. The study would be reviewed by the City's engineering
firm. Mr. Alexander stated it is definitely within their goals to have the roadways from
the eastern half line up with the western half. They would also support the rezoning of
the area.
Chairman Rotty gave a definition of the Spruce Street commercial area. It is a new
zoning district, and in earlier discussions with the Planning Commission and City
Council, it is one of very high quality type of development in a commercial nature. It
should be a continuation of the downtown Spruce Street district. Mr. Alexander stated .
the commission will not be disappointed. Chairman Rotty then addressed Mr.
Alexander's question regarding the acreage being viewed as wetlands. The commission
will discuss it, and if a resolution is not reached, perhaps the maps could be modified to
provide for more commercial property. Mr. Alexander stated it is their goal in order to
create a Spruce Street corridor as a pedestrian-friendly store front feel, they would like to
reserve the right to use the area for park/open space dedication for the overall
development. Chairman Rotty stated that request would have to be referred to the City
Council.
There were no comments by the public. Commissioner Johnson wanted to make sure that
if the flood plain study shows the 6-10 acres can be utilized, does the commission have to
re-approve it for these additional acres? As the report would be ready by the next
meeting, he would like to continue this until that time. The remaining members of the
commission were also in favor of continuing the Public Hearing to the November 26,
2002 meeting. After further thought, in order to prepare the information, staff would
recommend continuing the meeting to the December 10, 2002 meeting. The commission
agreed. MOTION by Johnson second by Larson to continue the Public Hearing to the
December 10,2002 Planning Commission meeting. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
.
.
.
.
Regular Planning Commission Minutes
November 12, 2002
Page 3
b)
Ordinance Repealing Title 4 Chapter 3, Amending Section 10-6-3: Signs,
Billboards and Amending Section 10-2-1: Definitions
The City Attorney has not yet completed her review of the proposed ordinance. Staff
recommended to take any public comments, and then continue the public hearing to the
next Planning Commission meeting. Chairman Rotty then stated the commission would
also take public comments at the next meeting. There were no comments by the public.
MOTION by Barker, second by Johnson to continue the public hearing to the December
10, 2002 Planning Commission meeting. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
4. Discussion
a) Discussion Concerning Possibility of Daycare Facility in Industrial Park
Ms. Jan Karrmann has contacted staff regarding opening a 100-child daycare center in
Farmington. She has looked at several suitable locations, but none are appropriate
because of availability, sale terms, price, etc. She would like to locate a daycare facility
in the industrial park. There are three unsold lots in the industrial park. Two lots face
Hwy 50. Ms. Karrmann has been discussing a 9-acre lot in the back of the industrial
park. Due to wetlands, drainage and pipeline easements there are 4-5 developable acres
left. Ms. Karrmann would like 1.5 to 2 acres. The HRA did not say they did not like the
idea, they did not say daycare is an inappropriate use in the industrial park. Some felt
there could be a more suitable place in town. They were not sure if the Planning
Commission would issue a conditional use permit if Ms. Karrmann applied for one. The
HRA was not familiar with the types of conditions the Planning Commission might
impose. Ms. Karrmann's option is to prepare a formal application for a conditional use
permit to present to the Planning Commission, however, Ms. Karrmann was willing to
proceed on a more informal basis. The HRA is looking for comments from the Planning
Commission to help them decide whether the Planning Commission is willing to split off
acreage from the parcel and sell it to Ms. Karrmann. Staff presented advantages and
disadvantages to the Planning Commission.
Advantages
- Ms. Karrmann has done a lot of research on the need for daycare and is convinced more
is needed.
- Having a daycare in the industrial park could be an advantage to workers that are
employed by those businesses.
- Eventually 208th Street will be connected with Akin Road and connect with Pilot Knob
Road. The visibility will be improved along with access to the site.
Regular Planning Commission Minutes
November 12, 2002
Page 4
Disadvantages
.
- The concept of having a daycare facility in an industrial park is not the first place
parents would think of.
- The type of facility built would not look like other buildings around it. If sold, it might
not have as many industrial uses as other buildings in the industrial park.
- This is the only property left in town owned and controlled by the HRA zoned for
industry.
Ms. Karrmann stated her loan has been approved. In regards to the industrial park, the 9-
acre lot is one option. Depending on the timetable, she would also be interested in
talking to the Devney's and Berglund's about available property. She would first like to
know if it could be a conditional use. She stated it would be an advantage to people who
work in the industrial park and need daycare and it could also be an incentive for selling
remaining lots. Farmington needs another chiIdcare facility. She plans to stay and hire
local employees.
Chairman Rotty complimented her on her business plan. A conditional use would be
required for a daycare facility in the industrial park. Commissioner Larson stated he has
never envisioned a daycare facility in the industrial park. He then asked if Ms. Karrmann
has looked at other locations such as the area by the Trinity Care Center. Ms. Karmann
stated that is within 1 mile of another daycare. Her idea is to have her own building and .
property versus a lease. She has three children and would not have a problem with
having her children at a daycare in the industrial park. She feels she would have 40-50
families. Commissioner Larson was wondering about the additional traffic. Ms.
Karrmann stated at a daycare there are only a few people at a time dropping off children
and it is very staggered. Commissioner Larson would like to give it more thought and
talk with other businesses in the industrial park.
Commissioner Heman is also concerned about additional traffic. Traffic in and out of the
industrial park is heavy. He would like more information from the current industrial park
businesses and see if there would be a more suitable site.
Commissioner Barker is open to the idea. He does have some concerns about the
location.
Commissioner Johnson also was not opposed to the idea. If there are enough people in
the industrial park who would like a daycare there, he felt the commission should support
it. The style of the building would be a concern for resale value, and also how the
playground area would be fenced.
Chairman Rotty stated the commission wants the business in town. He did question the
timing. Ms. Karrmann stated it would take a year to get the project done. She has also
.
.
.
.
Regular Planning Commission Minutes
November 12, 2002
Page 5
contacted the Knutsen property. The need is here now, she does not want to wait 18
months and then take a year to build after that.
Staff commented the situation with the Devney and Berglund parcels is progressing daily.
Both parcels have been appraised. Staff is in the process of developing financial
information regarding infrastructure. That should be completed in a week or two. There
is a business located in the industrial park that has outgrown their space. If the city does
not provide a space for them, they will go out of town. They want to build in the spring.
One or both of the parcels will be acquired this winter. Staff assumes the Devney's or
Berglund's would want to sell the entire parcel at once instead of just 1 acre. Sometime
this winter, staffwill know if this property would be available. A 1.5 to 2 acre lot could
be created possibly along Pilot Knob on the corner which would be close to the industrial
park.
Chairman Rotty stated he sees the need and would entertain a conditional use permit. If
Ms. Karmann's timeline would allow, he would like to see the HRA work on something
more advantageous for her. Ms. Karrmann stated her loan would expire in one year. The
commissioners would like to talk with other business owners before moving forward.
Staff can inform Ms. Karrmann of the price of the lot, and advised her to make a formal
offer to the HRA. If the HRA is willing to sell the lot, then she could come to the
Planning Commission for the conditional use permit.
b)
Discussion Regarding Possibility of Special Planning Commission Meeting on
November 26, 2002.
Possible topics were discussed. The commissioners will be available on that date.
MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker to adjourn. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
Respectfully submitted,
(~,-_7i -? /74
T---,-72~d.... 7r7 <...-LK.k::b..J
Cynthia Muller
Executive Assistant
Approved / / k,~
.
.
.
Planning Commission
Minutes
Special Meeting
November 26, 2002
1.
Call to Order
Chair Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Members Present: Rotty, Barker, Johnson, Larson
Members Absent: Heman
Also Present: Lee Smick, City Planner; Jim Atkinson, Assistant City Planner
2.
Approval of Minutes
MOTION by Larson, second by Johnson approving the November 12,2002 Regular
Minutes. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
3.
Public Hearings
a)
Ordinance Repealing Title 4 Chapter 3, Amending Section 10-6-3: Signs,
Billboards and Amending Section 10-2-1: Definitions (continued)
Staff has received suggestions from the city attorney that some reformatting
changes be made to the sign ordinance. The changes will streamline the
ordinance and make it more user friendly. In order to have time to accomplish
this, staff would like to bring this ordinance back to the December 10, 2002
meeting. MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker to continue the public hearing
to December 10, 2002. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
b)
Ordinance Amending Sections 10-2-1, 10-5-6, 10-5-7, 10-5-11, 10-5-12, and
10-5-14 and add Section 10-6-23 to the Farmington Zoning Code
Staff proposed to amend the zoning code to establish standards for the operation
of bed and breakfasts as a conditional use to four residential zoning districts and
the B-2 district. There are 16 standards that would apply to bed and breakfasts.
Some significant ones include they must be located within a historically
designated structure, there can be a maximum of 5 units per bed and breakfast,
and they must be licensed by the city on a yearly basis to ensure they are meeting
the conditions of approval. The Heritage Preservation Commission reviewed the
ordinance and recommended approval with a few minor changes.
The commission discussed having the ordinance read owner or agent occupied,
and agreed to having an agent occupy the structure. The commission then asked
about parking on corner lots and if that would be a problem. Staff stated the
meaning of the ordinance is that parking should not be allowed at the front door
of the structure. On a corner lot, the side of the structure would not be considered
the front. Off-street parking was discussed, where there may not be enough room
Special Planning Commission Minutes
November 26, 2002
Page 2
for off-street parking. This would be reviewed on a case-by-case basis and .
perhaps a variance would be required. Requiring a license was also discussed.
This was included in the ordinance due to any wine or food service that would
require a license. As far as Heritage Preservation Commission requirements, any
conditions placed by the HPC would be for the outside of the structure. Any
interior work must meet Secretary of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation. A
separation of 300 ft. between structures had been discussed previously. The HPC
recommended this requirement be removed. Whether special events such as
weddings, etc. could be held in the structure was discussed. For now, staff felt
placing this in the ordinance could be too restrictive.
MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker to close the public hearing. APIF,
MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker approving the
proposed amendments to the zoning code for bed and breakfasts and forwarding
the recommendation to the City Council. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
Staff received a request from a resident wanting to place a hot tub in his front yard. He
wants to build a 6- ft. fence around it. There is a 4- ft. limitation on any fence in the front
of the house. The resident then asked about placing a 4-ft. fence on top of planters, or
placing lattice work on the top of a 4-ft. fence, or building a berm and placing a fence on
top. Staff did not approve the first two choices, but there is nothing in the code
preventing the third option. The commission questioned if building a berm could create a
drainage problem. Whether a new as-built would be required will be discussed with .
engineering. The commission discussed whether it should be considered a fence, or just
screening. The Planning Commission could not provide a recommendation without more
information. StaffwilI review the situation further.
4. Adjourn
MOTION by Larson, second by Johnson to adjourn. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
Respectfully submitted,
~~~/ ///J-d:~
8;nthia Muller
Executive Assistant
/- () .
~,-v-€~/ ~c--/~ .;<QOd,
.
.
.
.
Planning Commission
Minutes
Regular Meeting
December 10, 2002
1.
Call to Order
Chair Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Members Present: Rotty, Barker, Heman, Johnson, Larson
Members Absent: None
Also Present: Lee Smick, City Planner; Jim Atkinson, Assistant City Planner
2.
Approval of Minutes
a) October 8, 2002
MOTION by Johnson, second by Larson to approve the October 8, 2002 minutes.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
b) November 26, 2002
MOTION by Barker, second by Johnson to approve the November 26, 2002
minutes. Voting for: Rotty, Barker, Johnson, Larson. Abstain: Heman.
MOTION CARRIED.
3.
Public Hearings
a) Ordinance Repealing Title 4 Chapter 3, Amending Section 10-6-3: Signs,
Billboards and Amending Section 10-2-1: Definitions (continued)
Staff is continuing to make revisions to the sign ordinance, therefore staff
suggested that the Planning Commission continue the public hearing for the sign
ordinance to the January 14, 2003 meeting. MOTION by Larson, second by
Johnson to continue the public hearing until January 14,2003. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
c)
Consider Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment -
Knutsen Property
The public hearing was held to consider a comp plan amendment and a zoning
map amendment for the Knutsen property located at the southwest intersection of
CSAH 50 and Denmark Avenue. The comp plan currently shows business park
and environmentally sensitive. Staff recommended a comp plan amendment for
37 acres from business park to commercial, and 3 acres from business park to
environmentally sensitive. These 3 acres contain gas line easements. Regarding
the zoning map, the current zoning is business park. Staff proposed the business
park area to be zoned Spruce Street corridor, and the environmentally sensitive
area be zoned parks and open space.
There are two issues that may affect the development of the property. One issue
is a flood fringe which is a portion of the floodplain that has a flow depth of less
than 1 foot. If this area is developed, the Developer would either be required to
Planning Commission Minutes
December 10,2002
Page 2
compensate floodplain volume elsewhere in the flood fringe, or prepare a .
floodplain study disputing the existing floodplain location and requesting a Letter
of Map Revision from FEMA to relocate the floodplain. The second issue is a
possible need for an EA W or AUAR to determine the environmental impacts.
The EA W is required if the square footage exceeds 200,000 square feet for
commercial property. The Opportunity Grant study area includes 450 acres,
which also might require an EA W. Staff would like to know if each of the
property owners should have an EA W done on their own, or if there should be an
AUAR done for everyone, which is less time consuming. If there is a mandatory
EA W, it would stop development until the study is done.
The commission felt it would be better to have one plan done for all the property
owners. It would be beneficial to have the Master Plan run consistent with the
AUAR. Staff requested approval on the following issues:
1.
Amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan from Business Park (40 acres) to
Commercial (37 acres) and Environmentally Sensitive (3 acres), with the
remainder of the Knutson property (20 acres) maintaining the current
designation of Environmentally Sensitive.
Amend the Zoning Map from BP (Business Park; 60 acres) to SSC
(Spruce Street Commercial; 37 acres) and P/OS (Parks/Open Space; 23
acres).
If the Planning Commission feels that the above issues need to be resolved
before amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map can be
recommended to the City Council, continue the public hearing to a future
date.
.
2.
3.
Mr. Matt Alexander, New Century Development, stated they can work with staff
as far as the issues with the river. Whether they want to be part of the long-term
process for the entire 450 acres, or come up with a plan that suits the Knutsen's
and their timeline to get the process moving, they have been choosing the latter.
Issues regarding the Spruce Street corridor can be worked out with staff As far
as the zoning and the comp plan amendment, the current line needs to be defined.
They have already fronted a lot of costs as far as surveys and studies to come up
with the information. Their engineers will give a report to the city showing where
that line should or should not be. New Century's timeline for development is to
start in 2003. The timeline for the Master Plan should be done by October 2003.
New Century will be performing an EA W themselves.
The commission needed to look at the comp plan amendment and the rezone and
review the timing of what is done with the amendment and the rezone. Regarding
the amendment and the rezone, the commission recommended staying with what
is on the books from the FEMA study done in the late 70's. If the developer
wants to challenge that or work on the mitigation with FEMA, they have a right
to. It is FEMA's responsibility to look at the boundaries. The amendment and
rezone was initiated by the city and the commission is in agreement. MOTION .
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes
December 10, 2002
Page 3
by Barker, second by Johnson to close the Public Hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker to approve the comp plan
amendment from business park to commercial and environmentally sensitive and
to rezone from business park to Spruce Street commercial and Parks/Open
Spaces. The commission directed staff to further research the issues regarding the
FEMA wetland line and the environmental studies and to defer sending the issue
to Council until more definitive answers are reached. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
b)
Variance Request - Minimum Lot Size Requirement
Applicant: Bob Donnelly
Mr. Donnelly requested a variance to a lot size requirement in the Ag zoning
district to create a 30-acre parcel. Mr. Donnelly has 20 acres, and would like to
subdivide 10 acres from the elementary school property, and combine it with his
property to form 30 acres. The minimum is 40 acres. A variance request must
meet 5 criteria. The main criteria is there must be a hardship present. The
hardship may be the code amendment that occurred. Until May 2002 this could
have been done without a variance. The feedlot on the 10 acres already exists.
Only 3 of the 10 acres would be used for a feedlot. A restriction will be placed on
the remaining 7 acres to prevent any encroachment of the feedlot towards the
school. There was no one in the audience to speak on this issue. The commission
agreed that a hardship was created by the code amendment. MOTION by
Larson, second by Heman to approve the variance request to the minimum lot size
in the A-I district and to allow the waiver, and to place a restriction on the 7 acres
that would create a buffer between the feedlot operation and the school. APIF,
MOTION CARRIED.
4. Adjourn
MOTION by Johnson, second by Heman to adjourn. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
Respectfully submitted,
~;C,{~)'7 .7Jg~
&Cynthia Muller
Executive Assistant
~ .!"
/ /. / .' /V.;<003
iC;;/}~v4{/;)&a',<--<-- r?r ~ .
t// j