Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/02/1996 CITY OF APPLE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES October 2, 1996 1. CALL TO ORDER The City of Apple Valley Planning Commission meeting was called to order at 7:01 p.m.. Members Present: Alan Fellmer, Frank Blundetto, Diane Nagler, Marcia Gowling, Paul Oberg, Karen Edgeton, and Joe McNamara. Members Absent: None. Staff Present: Rick Kelley, Tom Lovelace, Keith Gordon, Mike Dougherty, and City Clerk Mary Mueller. Others Present: See the sign-in sheet. Prior to consideration of the agenda, Chair Felkner introduced the newest member of the Commission, Joe McNamara. City Clerk Mary Mueller administered the oath of office to Mr. McNamara. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Chair Felkner asked Staff and the Commission members if they had any changes to the proposed agenda. There being none, he called for its approval. MOTION: Member Gowling moved, seconded by Member Blundetto, to approve the agenda as submitted. The motion carried 7 - 0. 3. APPROVAL OF SEPTEMBER 18, 1996 MINUTES Chair Felkner asked Staff and the Commission members if they had any changes or revisions to the proposed minutes submitted in the packet. There being none, he called for their approval. MOTION: Member Oberg moved, seconded by Member Edgeton, to approve the minutes as submitted. The motion carried 7 - 0. 4. CONSENT ITEMS -None - 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS - None - Planning Commission Minutes October 2, 1996 Page 2 6. LAND USE/ACTION ITEMS A. Valley Oaks Community Development Director Rick Kelley presented this item which had its public hearing at the previous Planning Commission meeting. The property is located on Pennock Avenue at the 128th Street intersection. It is proposed to construct a total of 46 townhome units on parcels of land located on both the east and west sides of Pennock Avenue. The property is currently zoned "M-6B", which allows up to 12 units per acre. Mr. Kelley reviewed the information contained in the staff report and noted that the current traffic counts on Pemiock Avenue are about 3,200 trips per day, well within its design capacity of 3,000 to 6,000 trips per day. He noted that neighborhood concern over southbound bus traffic would eventually be solved by the construction of a "bump out" lane on the left side of Pennock Avenue to allow southbound buses to remove themselves from the flow of traffic while loading and unloading. Staff was requested to contact the Minnesota Valley Transit Authority (MVTA) concerning the issue of buses staying parked in the southbound lane even when they are not loading or unloading passengers. Mr. Kelley noted that because of concerns raised over the informal alleyway that serves the Eaton Mobile Home Park, and which appeazs to be constmcted upon the western pazcel proposed for townhome development, Staff is recommending that approval be considered this evening only for the eastern parcel so that some of these other issues can be worked. out between the developer, the City, and the mobile home park owner. There was some discussion concerning the amount of landscaping and whether or not the greenspace guidelines were met for both the east and the west parcels when considered individually rather than in aggregate, and whether or not the additional landscape feature parcel (Parcel C) should be included in these calculations Mr. Kelley noted that in the staff report, both Parcel A (the east side) and Parcel B (the west side) were calculated separately. In both cases, the greenspace guidelines of 60% were met or exceeded. Commission Members discussed among themselves the design of the buildings. Commissioner Edgeton suggested that in the past, since the City has required a minimum number of porches on the rear of the buildings to break up its appearance, in this case a similar requirement might be appropriate. Cormmissioner Gowling stated that because porches are offered as an option to purchasers, she has a problem with making their installation a requirement of the developer. It was noted that historically about half of Mr. Diedrich's townhome purchasers end up having a 3-season porch installed. There being no further discussion on the development proposal, Chair Felimer stated that he would entertain motions for approvals. MOTION: Member Edgeton moved, seconded by Member Oberg, to recommend approval of the preliminary plat for the portion of property on the east side of Pennock Avenue only in accordance with the Staff conditions. The motion carved 7 - 0. Planning Commission Minutes October 2, 1996 Page 3 MOTION: Member Edgeton moved, seconded by Member Gowling, to recommend approval of a Conditional Use Pexrnit for the use of vinyl siding in place of natural wood. There was a general discussion concerning the percentage of the building that would have a brick face. The City's ordinance requires at least 50% of the building faces to have brick. Commissioner Oberg noted that the developer in his negotiations with the residents of the Saddle Ridge neighborhood has evidently agreed to have the west face of the buildings which face Pennock Avenue to be all brick, and he believes that this should be an amendment to the main motion. Commissioners Edgeton and Cowling agreed that this amendment could be considered. Additional discussion concerning the brick requirements indicated that if the west face was to be 100% brick, brick on the other sides and rears would probably be reduced because the total requirement for 50% would remain unchanged. Some of the Commissioners felt that the distribution of the brick should be up to the developer in order to arrive at the most pleasing architectural style, rather than arbitrarily requiring certain percentages on different building faces. Chair Fellmer called for a vote on the amendment. The amendment failed 0 - 7. Chair Felkner then called for a vote on the main motion. The main motion passed 7 - 0. MOTION: Member Edgeton moved, seconded by Member Blundetto, to recommend approval of the site plan and building permit authorization for the 36 townhome units on the east side, including the setback variances as requested, and in accordance with other Staff suggestions, but also including a requirement that the 2-1/2% landscape requirements for both Parcel A and Parcel B stand alone, as well as that at least one porch is constructed on the reaz of each building cluster. The motion carried 6 - 1 (Cowling). DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Sketch Plan for Sign Variance Assistant Planner Tom Lovelace outlined the sketch plan request before the Commission. The Conoco multi-tenant building is located on the northwest corner of Cedar Avenue and 145th Street, and currently has one freestanding pylon sign and a number of building signs which identify the individual tenants. Champion Auto, one of the tenants, is requesting feedback on a possible variance application to allow additional signage to be placed on the existing pylon sign. Mr. Lovelace referred to the information in the staff report concerning the sign ordunance requirements. Lloyd Tishler stated that he is the president of the Apple Valley Champion Auto Stores, and that he believes their business is suffering because they do not have adequate signage exposure to Cedaz Avenue. He noted that at one time, prior to the construction of the Burnet Realty building on the lot to the north, the rear of the building had much greater exposure to Cedar Avenue, and a sign located on the Planning Commission Minutes October 2, 1996 Page 4 reaz of the building provided them adequate visibility. He said that their current building sign located on the east face of the building facing Cedar Avenue cannot be seen until a vehicle is approximately even with the building, and that their business has suffered consequently. Commissioner McNamara asked who owns the building. It was noted that the building was purchased about a year and a half ago from the Conoco Corporation and is now owned by Auto Stop. The Auto Stop organization has chosen to devote all of the existing freestanding signage to its own purposes rather than to allow individual tenants to utilize a portion of the signage. Mr. McNamara suggested that when the Champion Auto Store lease is up that they negotiate with the building owner to receive permission to utilize some of the pylon signage for their own purposes. Chair Felkner noted that Mr. Tishler would have the right to apply for a variance, but that given the existing conditions and the past practices in the City concerning variance requests, approval would entail very rough sailing. City Attorney Mike Dougherty noted that a formal variance application would also have to be signed by the property owner, and in this case the hazdship being experienced is essentially due to their own actions because they won't share the pylon siguage already permitted. He said that it is his belief that this would, therefore, not meet the hazdship test required by the ordinance. Mr. Tishler thanked the Commnission for their comments. 8. OTHER BUSINESS A. Commercial Zoning Districts Commmuty Development Director Rick Kelley explained that the City Council has referred to the Conunission a review of permitted and conditional uses in commercial zoning districts. The Commission review is to entail two separate components. First, the City Attorney's Office will be reviewing the language of the preamble of each zoning district to determine whether or not the intent listed in that preamble conflicts or causes problems in the interpretation of the magnitude of permitted and conditional uses that aze listed in the subsequent sections in the ordinance. Planning Staff will be preparing an evaluation on the second part, which has to do with determining whether or not the permitted and conditional uses aze properly categorized. Iri essence, a use should be placed in the conditional use category only if it has certain chazacteristics different than those of the permitted uses which might entail special provisions or conditions upon its establishment so that it does not adversely impact the adjacent properties. Staff will be preparing an analysis concerning such things as typical levels of traffic generation, hours of operation, and other quantified impacts of both the permitted and conditional uses to determine whether or not some of those uses might be misclassified. Commissioner Joe McNamara expressed his appreciation for his recent appointment to the Planning Commission, and stated that he was looking forward to ma.lang a contribution in helping the City manage its future. He stated that prior to his appointment, he had made a previous commitment to be out of town at the October 16th meeting, but that he will be making every effort to attend all subsequent meetings. Planning Commission Minutes October 2, 1996 Page 5 Commissioner Gowling noted that she would also be out of town on October 16th. 9. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Member Blundetto moved, seconded by Member Nagler, to adjourn the meeting. The motion carried 7 - 0. The meeting adjourned at 7:59 p.m.