HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/06/1996)?
CITY OF APPLE VALLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
March 6,1996
L CALL TO ORDER
The City of Apple Valley Plarmiug Commission rneetu~g was called to order at 7:03 p.m. by Chair
Alan Fellmer.
Members Present: Alan Fellmer, Frank Blundetto, Diane Nagler, Marcia Gowling, Karen Edgeton,
Dave Swanson and Paul Oberg.
Members Abse~tt: None.
Staff Present: Rick Kelley, Kathy Bodmer, Tom Lovelace, Keith Gordon, and Mike Dougherty.
Others Present: See the sign-in sheet.
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Chair Fellmer asked Staff and the Commission members if they had any changes or additions to the
proposed agenda. There being none, he called for its approval.
MOTION: Member Cowling moved, seconded by Member Blundetto, to approve the draft agenda
as submitted. The motion carried 7 - 0.
3. APPROVAL OF FEBRUARY 21,1996 MINUTES
Chair Fellmer asked Staff and the Couunission members if they had any changes to the draft minutes
submitted in the packet. There being none, he called for their approval.
MOTION: Member Edgeton moved, seconded by Member Oberg, to approve the February 21,
1996 minutes as submitted. The motion carried 6 - 0, with one abstention (Swanson).
4. CONSENT ITEMS
-None -
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Wlufiey P-aza Planned Unit Development Revisions
Chair Fellmer opened the public hearing with the standard remarks. IIe asked that all those wishing
to address this issue to sign the roster, to come to the podium to speak and address the chair with their
questions.
Planning Commission Minutes
March 6,1996
Page 2
Assistant Planner Tom Lovelace introduced himself and identified on an overhead
transpazency display the location of the project, which is the northwest corner of Cedaz
Avenue and 155th Street, also known as Whitney Drive.
Mr. Lovelace noted that the. property is currently designated on the comprehensive plan
for a combination of Retail Business and General Business uses and is currently zoned under
Planned Unit Development Ordinance No. 532, Subzones 1 and 2. The property is currently
platted as two sepazate lots.
Mr. Lovelace went on to state that the purpose of the public hearing is to consider an
amendment to the Planned Unit Development to allow additional retail business uses within
Zone 1, and to expand Zone 1 to encompass both of the vacant lots. The expanded retail
business uses would provide for a establishment of a furniture store to accommodate a
mattress lquidator's operation, restaurants not having any drive-thru activities up to 33% of a
multi-tenant building, and wine and/or 3,2 beer on sale as part of a conditional use permit
process in conjunction with restaurant activities. Finally, it is requested to increase the
maximum building coverage from its current maximum of 20% to 30%. Mr. Lovelace then
turned the presentation over to the project petitioner.
Mr. Wayde Johnson introduced himself and stated that he works for Amcon
Corporation; which is the entity responsible for the design and construction of this proposed
building. He stated that the building materials would be a combination of rock faced block
along the base, with brick material above this. The building would also include canopies and
gooseneck decorative lighting above the canopies. Mr: Johnson explained the proposed uses
in the building, which at this time would. consist of a mattress liquidators operation a coffee
shop; and a bagel shop. The building as proposed. would cover 22% of the land,. up slightly
from the current maximum of 20%.
Commissioner Oberg asked if the. proposed restaurants at this time consist of a coffee
shop and. a bagel shop, why it is requested to provide for wine and beer as a conditional use.
Mr. Dewey Johnson then approached the Commission. He stated that he is with
Security Development, the leasing agent for the proposed project. He said that they have
requested the wine and beer provision in order to provide flexibility in leasing the property in
the future.
Commissioner Edgeton asked why the proposed building coverage was being increased
from 20% to 30% if this building only needs to have 22%.
Wayde Johnson stated that the 30% maximum coverage is typical in a Retail Business
category, but with their proposed uses and the required parking for those uses, they would be
maxed out at a 22% coverage. They believe that having the 30% maximum, however, would
give them the flexibility to add building area if fixture tenants are of a nature which require
fewer pazking stalls.
Planning Commission Minutes
March 6, 1996
Page 3
Commissioner Gowling asked for clarification on what typical coverages are in
commercial districts.
Assistant Planner Tom Lovelace stated that in normal Retail Business Zones, 30% is
the maximum. But this particular Planned Development limited the maximum to 20%.
Commissioner Edgeton asked why this 20% cap was originally established in the
Planned Unit Development.
Mike Dougherty, the City Attorney, stated that the current Planned Development
language was in essence a response to the initial building proposals when the Planned
Development was established, and at that time the buildings only occupied 20%.
Chair Felkner asked Mr. Lovelace if the balance of the project was in conformance with
the Planned Development criteria.
Mr. Lovelace stated that the limitation on drive-thru's would prevent a typical "fast
food restaurant" from desiring to occupy the premises. A standard restaurant size of
approximately 2,400 square. feet is what was used in computing. the necessary parking stalls.
He noted that the proposed freestanding sign. needed to be pulled back in order to meet the
minimum freestanding sign setbacks. Also, the Fire Marshall has indicated the need for
placement of a Sre hydrant in front of the building. Finally, some additional landscape islands
would need to be created to meet the 5% requirement in this Planned Development.
Mr. Lovelace also noted that a traffic analysis. by the City's consultant (SEH) indicated
that the south access would function more safely if it was designated as a one-way entrance
only. In order to provide for additional access onto Whitney Drive, a second access on the
north/south portion of Whitney could be added at the back of the building.
Also, at a minimum, the existing shared access to the north/south portion to Whitney
should be widened so that there is no jog for vehicles entering or leaving the site at that point.
He also noted that the Forestry Department has reviewed the landscape plan and feels that it is
adequate with a proposed minor modification of a few plantings.
Chair Felkner asked if the number of proposed parking stalls would be adequate if a
third restaurant is established in the building.
Mr. Lovelace stated at the standard parking criteria of one parking stall per 150 square
feet of building area, there is adequate parking. However, a more detailed calculation would
need to be done when a specific restaurant might establish itself, since the parking criteria for
restaurants are based on the number of seats in the restaurant.
Wayde Johnson noted that different types of restaurants have different seating designs
and capacities and that the actual number of required parking stalls could vary quite
dramatically.
Planning Commission Minutes
March 6, 1996
Page 4
A general discussion ensued concerning calculations for restaurants and the typical
restaurant designs related to the number of seats provided in them.
Chair Felkner asked that some more detailed calculations be provided at the next
Planning Commission meeting in order to determine just what the minimum number of parking
stalls would be, based on the maximum amount of space that could be used for restaurant
purposes. Also, he asked if there were any distance requirements for the establishment of
liquor sales or wine and 3.2 beer as it relates to schools. There are currently no such distance
requirements.
Chair Felkner then opened the public hearing for audience comments.
Mr. Gene. Peterson approached the Commission. He stated that he is one of the
principal. owners of the existing Whitney Plaza building, located to the north, which has as its
primary tenants Midas Muffler and Jiffy Lube. He noted that when the initial public hearings
were held for this Planned Unit Development, it had been proposed to place a Dairy Queen and
Taco Bell restaurant on the south portions of the site, and that these were eliminated based on
the adverse comments received at the hearing, He is concerned now that additional restaurant
uses are being proposed on the site. He also noted that their existing building is constructed of
100% brick face, as opposed to a combination of rock faced block and brick. He said that he
is not opposed, but feels that they should all be treated equally.
Mr. Peterson also noted that there. is in existence along the rear side of all these
properties an easement and covenant that provides for a certain amount of public parking for
school. and athletic activities. He asked whether or not the use of the parking for these uses
had been taken into account when the total parking calculations for the retail uses are
performed.
Mr. Peterson said he also felt that the maximum square footage requirement should not
be adjusted upward because. more retail space could generate more traffic. He again noted the
potential for the restaurants being an attractive nuisance relative to school kids, although not
necessarily the coffee shop and bagel shop.
Chair Felkner asked for a clarification on the proposed exterior building services. He
felt that they should match one another.
Wayde Johnson noted that the rock faced block would be the first four feet in height of
the building; which is essentially the wainscot area. The balance of the building is proposed to
be all brick.
Dave Johnson of Mattress Liquidators approached the Commission and stated that he
would be the ongoing owner of the premises. He said that he reviewed the minutes for the
initial Whitney Plaza public hearing approval process, and feels that the restaurants that they
are proposing would be completely different than the ones that generated the objections
previously. He stated that they have had some informa- contact with representatives of the
elementary school, and that they feel that those proposed uses are appropriate.
Planning Commission Minutes
March 6,.1996
Page 5
He said that they are aware of the deed restrictions concerning the shazed pazking on
the reaz of the property, and said that while the pubic is entitled to use it, this does not mean
that customers and employees of their facilities would be prohibited from using it during other
hours of the day. He said that they will be adding site lighting on the reaz of the property
which will make this shared parking area safer.
He feels that the percentage of building coverage was a compromise that was struck as
part of the initial Planned Unit Development, and that what they are requesting is only a minor
revision:
Chair Felkner asked Assistant Planner Tom Lovelace to perform a detailed review of
the minutes of the original hearings and to provide the Commission with a summarization of
those minutes along with the specifics of the restrictions on parking that were placed on the
property.
Bonnie Tangness of 7589 Whitney Drive approached the Commission. She stated that
she lives in the existing townhome project and was present at the original hearings when the
objections on the fast food restaurants arose. She said that what is being proposed at this time
is completely different and she does not have a problem with them. However, she is concerned
over the potential on-sale wine and beer licensing. She noted that while she and many of the
adjacent residents had expressed concern about potential. problems. that retail business uses in
this area might bring, she admitted that the existing Whitney Plaza building has not generated
those problems. She noted that sometimes when semi-trailers enter the property they make
wide right turns, and so she had some concern over the turning radiuses and configuration of
the parking area. She also noted that they do experience a certain amount of "cut through"
traffic from. Cedar Avenue, which is not there to patronize. the businesses, but which does cut
through the property by using the right turn access of off Cedar and then entering Whitney
Avenue from the center of the property, without even slowing down or stopping at the
driveway access point.
Commissioner Edgeton had a question concerning the hours of operation for the
proposed bagel operation.
Kurt DeMarais of Chesapeake Bagels approached the podium. He stated that he is the
franchise holder for Chesapeake Bagels throughout the Twin Cities Area. He also stated that
he feels somewhat unusual in being here in that he was the operation manager for Taco Bell at
the time that this site was proposed for Taco Bell when the original Whitney Plaza hearing was
held.
He stated that the bagel operation would run from 6:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. and that they
are not open later in the evening because the sales at the time aze rather mazginal for their type
of business. He stated that it is their intent to make the Chesapeake Bagel operation a
neighborhood and community gathering place. He feels that they would generate a significant
amount of business from the immediate residential neighborhood. He went on to discuss the
business philosophy of their operation and noted that between 65 and 75% of their business is
take-out. He said that 35% of their business occurs in the morning from the hours of 6:30 to
Planning Commission Minutes
March 6, 1996
Page 6
8:30 a.m.; and that 70% of their business occurs between the hours of 6:30 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.
A typical store size for their operations is between 2,000 and 2,500 square feet.
Commissioner Oberg asked if a second restaurant was established at the center that had
beer and wine sales, if he would not feel that that type of clientele might adversely impact his
operation. Mr. DeMazais said that he did not believe that it would.
Commissioner Blundetto asked for clarification on the hours again. In some cases they
do not open unti16:30 a.m.
Daue Johnson stated that when about a 1,200 square foot bay is added for a coffee
shop, the building would probably be coaxed out in terms of pazking for any additional
restaurants.
Commissioner Edgeton stated that she would like to see a list of Class I and Class II
restaurant definitions in order to assure herself that appropriate restaurants would be located in
this center. She is not concerned with the proposed bagel and coffee shop, but if they move
out she would like to be sure that future restaurants. would be compatible with the
neighborhood.
Bonnie Tangness asked for a clarification on why beer and wine sales were asked for
within the Planned Development amendment.
Dave Johnson stated. that they were simply looking for some flexibility in the use of the
property so that the City would not have to micromanage changes in the Planned Development
Zoning. as tenants change over time. He also noted that a conditional. use permit would have to
be applied for as part. of beer and wine, and. that there would be an additional public hearing at
that time: Mr. Johnson stated that he; as Mattress Liquidators as the prime tenant, would also
be very concerned that other uses in the center were of a compatible nature.
Mr. Bob Emery then approached the podium. He stated that he is currently a manager
at a separate Mattress Liquidator Store, and was the individual who originally saw the "for
sale" sign on this property and brought it to the attention of Mr. Johnson. He stated that they
have about 15 customers per day, so a Mattress Liquidator store is actually a very low traffic
generator. He stated that the semi-trailer trucks currently seen parked on the vacant part of
the property are actually not there as part of the existing Whitney Plaza tenant deliveries, but
rather must be owned by a local resident who is pazking the truck there because the property is
vacant.
A general discussion ensued over City regulations concerning the parking of semi-
trailers.
Mr. Gene Peterson, the principal owner for the property to the north, stated that they
have contacted the police over this illegal parking and use of their premises.
Planning Commission Minutes
March 6, 1996
Page 7
Commissioner Oberg said that he continues to have a problem with the proposal for
wine and beer sales. He asked the petitioner if this allowance was eliminated if it would
prevent the project from going forward.
Dave Johnson stated that he does not believe it would stop the project.
Chair Felkner noted that it is the Commission's policy not to act on the same night of a
project's public hearing: He suggested that Mr. Johnson think this over for consideration. at the
next meeting. The wine and beer sales really seems to be the only hang-up concerning the
project.
Commissioner Blundetto noted that the Bruegger's Bagel. operation at County Road 42
and Pennock Avenue seems to have created an awful lot of traffic, and has quite a high demand
for parking. He asked for an analysis of building square footage relative to on-site parking of
that project compared to this project.
Mr. DeMarais noted that the Apple Valley Bruegger's Bagel is actually one of the top
five in the metro area, generating more than $1 million in sales annually.
ChairFelkner then closed the public hearing with the standard remarks.
6. LAND USE/ACTION ITEMS
A. GoodwilUEaster Seats Store
Assistant Planner Kathy Bodmer introduced herself and noted that the project concerns
a preliminary plat to subdivide property, and-a building permit/site plan review for the: property
located on the southwest corner of 153rd Street and Garrett Avenue.
Mr. Lee Hanson approached the Commission, representing Winkleman Building
Corporation and Goodwill Easter Seals on the proposed project. He reviewed the issues that
had been raised at the previous public hearing concerning signage, shared access, drainage and
the proposed grading plan for the site. He identified the solutions to these issues.
1) A signage plan in conformance with City regulations has been submitted.
2) They have a revised site plan that now indicates a central access point. They
are, however, continuing to pursue a joint access with the owner of the Frank's Nursery site
and have identified. that as an alternate. This would proceed if they are able to come to
satisfactory terms with the owner (Mid-America).
3) They have revised their drainage plan to show the elevations and have raised the
bottom of the truck dock pit to meet the City requirements.
4) The grading plan has been reviewed with the City Engineer.
Planning Commission Minutes
March 6, 199b
Page 8
Chair Felkner asked if they are unable to work out an agreement with the owner of the
Frank's Nursery site, if the revised access plan continues to allow semi-trailer access to the site.
Mr. Hanson explained the circulation pattern and indicated that while they would have
to run in front of the building, they could continue to make the loop without having to backup.
Chair Felkner then. asked Kathy Bodmer if she had any comments on the revised plans.
Ms. Bodmer noted that the center access point being shown does work appropriately,
and that they continue to show an alternate with Frank's if they can work another agreement
with Mid-America. She also noted that the sign plan submitted does meet the City's sign code
requirements. She noted that the drainage plan now indicates an elevation at the truck dock pit
which is appropriate to the minimum store sewer elevations required by the city engineer; and
that the grading pernut application would simply need to be submitted to the City Council for
approval.
Commissioner Blundetto asked a question about the provision for sanitary sewer
service.
City Engineer Keith Gordon explained where the sanitary sewer would have to come
from to serve this property, and that Mr. Winkler, the. owner of the balance of property, has
agreed verbally to an assessment for the lateral line.
Commissioner Oberg asked about the dashed parking spaces being shown on the site
plan.
Lee Hanson. stated that they would. only be installed if the building addition, which is
also a dashed line, occurs in the future.
Commissioner Blundetto asked for a clarification on the circulation route for semi-
trailers, and Lee Hanson illustrated where this would occur in a U-shaped direction. on the site
plan.
MOTION: Member Swanson moved, seconded by Member Nagler, to recommend
approval of the preliminary plat. The motion carried 7 - 0.
MOTION: Member Swanson moved, seconded by Member Gowling, to recommend
approval of the site plan and building permit authorization with staff suggested criteria A and B
only, C already having been satisfied.
Commissioner Oberg during the discussion stated that he would like to make it clear
that a shared access with the Frank's Nursery property is the preferred access point rather than
a point in the middle of the lot.
Planning Commission Minutes
March 6, 1996.
Page 9
Commissioner Blundetto also stated that he would wish to add to the motion that
additional staff and council assistance be provided in attempting to convince Mid-America to
grant the shared access.
The maker and the second. of the motion both agreed to these changes in the motion.
The motion then carried 7 - 0.
7. DISCUSSION ITEMS
-None -
8. OTHER BUSINESS
A. Annual Business Meeting
Chair Felkner noted. that after appointments are made to the Planning Commission by
the City Council, an annual business meeting occurs at the first meeting following that council
action. The officer positions include Chair, Vice Chair, and Secretary.
Member Edgeton nominated Alan Felkner for Chair, and Commissioner Cowling
seconded the nomination.
Commissioner Edgeton then moved to close the nominations. and. elect Alan Felkner as
the Chair, and this. was seconded by Member Dowling. The motion carried 7 - 0:
Chair Felkner moved to nominate Karen Edgeton. as Vice Chair and this nomination.
was seconded by Commissioner Swanson.
Chair Felkner then. mooed to close the nominations and elect Karen as Vice Chair, and
Commissioner Swanson seconded this motion: The motion carried 7 - 0.
Commissioner Edgeton nominated Commissioner Cowling to be Secretary, seconded
by Member Oberg. Member Edgeton then moved. that the nominations be closed and that
Member Cowling be elected. This motion was seconded by Member Nagler. -The motion
carried 7 - 0.
Bvlaws
Commissioner Blundetto moved that the existing Bylaws be readopted in their current
form. The motion was seconded by Member Swanson. The motion tamed 7 - 0.
Chair Felkner noted, however, that in Appendix B, the language of the public hearings
should be modified to reflect the current practices of having the petitioner present the majority
of the proposal.
Planning Commission Minutes
March 6, 1996
Page 10
9. ADJOURNMENT
Member Blundetto moved, seconded by Member Gowling, to adjourn the meeting.
The motion carried 7 - 0. The meeting adjourned at 8:27 p.m.