Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6/12/07 . . . Planning Commission Minutes Regular Meeting June 12, 2007 1. Call to Order Chair Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Rotty, Oswald, Larson, Barker (arrived at 7:30 pm) Members Absent: Fitzloff Also Present: Tony Wippler - Assistant City Planner, Lee Smick - City Planner, John Milde 2. Approval of Minutes a) May 8, 2007 MOTION by Larson, second by Oswald to approve the May 8, 2007 minutes. Commissioner Barker absent for this approval. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 3. Public Hearings a) Revise Section 10-2-1 concerning Zoning Definitions Applicant: City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Staff is recommending changes to the City's Zoning Code definitions. A list of proposed changes was submitted to the Planning Commission Members for review. The items are primarily definitions that need to be updated or included in the Code. There will be ongoing recommendations for changes to the Code throughout the year. Some of the items to be reviewed are District requirements, swimming pools, boulevard trees, signs, lot coverage and garages. With regard to garages, a requirement for a paved access is being recommended. Chair Rotty stated that he is concerned that this requirement will affect garage accesses off of alleys. Staff stated that the change will only effect new garages; not those that are already existing. The item that relates to densities was removed from consideration to be worked on further. MOTION by Oswald, second by Larson to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Larson, second by Oswald to recommend approval of the proposed changes; excluding the item related to densities. Commissioner Barker was absent for this action. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. b) Ordinance amending Title 10 - Creation of a Neighborhood Preservation Overlay District Applicant: City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 . Planning Commission Minutes June 12,2007 Page 2 An ordinance is being proposed that would allow future creation of Neighborhood Preservation Overlay Districts. The ordinance would place requirements on demolition of structures, moving of structures and construction of new structures within the District. The permits for any of those activities would need to be reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission. The portion of the proposed ordinance that related to building maintenance has been removed. There was a neighborhood meeting held to obtain feedback from residents regarding the proposed ordinance. The District creation would be initiated by a petition submitted by residents. There would need to be a minimum of 25 adjoining properties to create the District. Of the 25 (or more) properties to be considered, at least 50% of the homeowners would have to vote in favor of moving forward with the District. . Mr. Tom Jensen, 701 5th Street, asked where the initial district is going to be. Staff replied that an area of Oak Street had been considered as an example, but no district is going to be created at this point. The creation of a district would be resident driven. Mr. Jensen also asked for explanation of how his zoning would change. Staff explained that his R-D zoning would not change. The Neighborhood Preservation Overlay District is an overlay, but the underlying zoning remains the same. Mr. Jensen stated that he read in the paper that he would not be able to make maintenance changes to his home if he was in the Overlay District. Chair Rotty stated that the maintenance portion has been removed from the ordinance. Staff stated that the idea behind the District is to preserve historic neighborhoods from infill with contemporary structures. Mr. Jensen stated that he didn't feel that the communication process about the proposed ordinance has been adequate. Staff will look into the communication process. Mr. Colin Garvey, 713 Oak Street, stated that there were discussions last fall about possible commercial development along Elm Street in the future. He stated that in order for commercial development to take place along Elm, there will be a need for off-street parking, which means that developers could potentially need to purchase properties along Oak Street. He stated that he feels that there should be more meetings regarding the proposed ordinance and further consideration of the potential impact on future development. Commissioners Larson and Oswald stated that they would agree that there should be further consideration on this topic. Chair Rotty also felt that there should be more review. MOTION by Larson, second by Oswald to continue this item to the July 10, 2007 Planning Commission Meeting. Commissioner Baker was absent for this action. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 4. Discussion . a) Final Plat - Riverbend 2nd Addition Mattamy Homes is requesting Final Plat of Riverbend 2nd Addition. There are 27 residential lots in this phase and a number of outIots. This would include 13 additional lots to what was originally platted in 2005. The residentia110ts will be on the southern portion of the property. There are 2 out10ts included that are part of an Planning Commission Minutes June 12, 2007 Page 3 . adverse possession claim that is still unresolved. Those areas would not be deeded to the City but would remain the property of the developer. Engineering has recommended approval of the plat. There is a park area located in Outlot E and the Park and Recreation Director has given his approval for the parks and trails proposed. The lot sizes meet the minimum zoning requirements. Staff is recommending that the plat be approved with the following contingencies: 1. The final plat approval is contingent on the preparation and execution of the development contract. 2. Satisfaction of all engineering comments as well as approval of the construction plans for grading, storm water and utilities by the Engineering Division. Mr. Doug Bonar, 18120 Echo Drive, stated that the residents involved in the adverse possession claim have been unable to reach the developer to resolve the issue. He is requesting that the minutes be sent to the developer in the hope that they will read them and respond to the residents. MOTION by Larson, second by Oswald to recommend approval of the Final Plat with the two contingencies. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. . b) Site Plan - New City Hall and 1st Street Garage The site plan for the New City Hall and 1 st Street Garage was received on May 9th. The site is 1.081 acres and the location is at the intersection of Spruce Street and 3rd Street. The six parcels have been combined into one lot. The plan meets the setback requirements, minimum parking spaces and lot coverage. The parcel is in the B-2 zoning district. There are 72 parking spaces in the plan. For comparison purposes, the old City Hall site has 75 parking spaces. The City Hall building is proposed to have a brick exterior. The building has been approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission. There is an alley behind the location that will be paved. There is access to the site from the alley and from Spruce Street. Landscaping is not required in the B-2 zoning district but there will be landscaping and a continuation of the streetscape that is currently present in the downtown area. The roof mounted equipment is the only item that will need to be resolved to meet the City Code requirements. The roof top equipment either has to be centrally located or screened. The architects have submitted elevation views of the building with and without the screening. Chair Rotty asked if the unit could be moved further south so that it is less visible. Commissioner Larson asked why this code wasn't addressed during the building's design process. The architects stated that due to the variety of equipment available, this unit was used to present a "worst case scenario". There is a potential that the unit that is actually used could be smaller. Commissioner Larson stated that he feels that because other businesses are forced to comply with the code, this building should as well. He feels that the material used for screening should be consistent with the rest of the exterior rather than metal. He also stated that he feels that this project has not followed the proper steps and the proper order with regard to Planning Commission approval. The Commissioners all stated that they would like to see the requirements of the code met either by moving the unit or by providing screening; preferably not metal. Chair Rotty asked if the streetscape along Spruce Street is in a style that we would like to continue for future projects. Staff replied that . Planning Commission Minutes June 12,2007 Page 4 . this is an excellent opportunity to create a streetscape that could be continued along Spruce Street for new or redevelopment projects. The 15t Street Garage will replace the current building on the site. There is a well house on the site that will be maintained. The plan has be rearranged move the impound lot further away from the FAA Center's daycare center. The main entry has been moved to a more central location. The building is in the same location but it is larger (approximately 5,200 square feet). There will be 4 overhead doors. There is landscaping and a rain garden on the site. There will be a 6 foot tall chain link fence that will have mesh screening. There will be barbed wire on the top of the fence for security purposes. There are 5 parking spaces. The plan meets all setback requirements. There is also a green space on the plan. The Commissioners emphasized the need for adequate screening for the neighbors. MOTION by Larson, second by Barker to approve the Site Plan contingent on either moving of the roof top unit or screening per City ordinance, and also contingent upon meeting all Engineering and Planning requirements. APIF, MOTION APPROVED. . c) Sketch Plan - Business Bungalows - Farmington Business Park Mr. Michael Braun has submitted a sketch plan for 13 duplex buildings on Lot 3, Block 2 of the Farmington Business Park. The property is zoned B-3 PUD. The structures are 50 feet x 50 feet with 14 foot ceiling heights. There are 10 foot x 12 foot overhead doors. They are meeting the side & rear yard setbacks, however the front yard setback needs to be increased to 20 feet. The parking requirements have been met. Some of the potential uses for the buildings are: hobbies, incubator businesses, or automotive work. There have been administrative rules and regulations submitted by the developer. The lot coverage requirements have been met. There will need to be a landscaping plan submitted as the project moves forward. Mr. Michael Braun stated that he is concerned about the cost of keeping the buildings at least 50% brick or concrete exteriors. Chair Rotty stated that the design requirements for the development will need to be followed. There will be further review of possible screening options on the rear of the buildings. Chair Rotty also mentioned that there should be careful examination of the possible uses for the buildings, and the permitted and conditional uses that are allowed per the zoning. The Commissioners were in favor ofthe proposed plan overall. . d) Sketch Plan - John Milde - Farmington Business Park The applicant is submitting a sketch plan for Lot 2, Block 2 of the Farmington Business Park for a multi-tenant building. The spaces include a space for a body shop (approx. 9,000 square feet) and a landscape area (approx. 2,000 square feet) and an additional space to be leased (approx. 10,000 square feet). The body shop tenant may need to have a conditional use permit depending on if the use qualifies as major or minor auto repair. The building is concrete block and metal. The building meets all setback and lot coverage requirements. There are 71 off street parking spaces, 31 of which are labeled as vehicle storage. The Planning Commission would have to approve any outside storage and there are additional screening requirements. There will need to be a landscaping plan submitted when the site plan is received. Mr. John Milde stated that the outside storage spaces would be used to store vehicles for short periods of time while they are being worked on or waiting for parts, etc. Mr. Milde . . . Planning Commission Minutes June 12, 2007 Page 5 stated that he is concerned that the need for a conditional use permit might put his project behind schedule. Staff stated that there could be a public hearing for the conditional use permit in July and it could be addressed at the same time as the site plan. Mr. Milde asked if the screening has to be wood fencing as is stated in the B-3 PUD. Staff stated that they will look into the fencing requirement further. e) 620 5th Street - variance for zero setback of accessory structure The applicant, Ian Menoch, wanted to discuss the relocation of his lot line, but was not present at tonight's meeting. The change would make the neighbor's existing garage at a zero setback. City Planner Lee Smick stated that she felt that there was no hardship, but instructed Mr. Menoch that he could present his case to the Commission. The Chair Rotty stated that if Mr. Menoch would like to discuss the item in the future he can attend a meeting and have the variance discussed but the Commission would not be able to take action on it tonight without him present. 5. ADJOURN MOTION by Oswald, second by Barker to adjourn. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfull~mitted, ~~->~ ,;-__.._...//~'l_....ec: ~~.~./.. ..-""~ ...,",,~:~.:::.........._........_..J / ".c'<. ~ ,f ~~::""H_'._' - . \ ",/ ......,\ I' .. { \ LIsa DargIS \ j- Administrative Assistant .J Approved