Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/17/2009CITY OF APPLE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JUNE 17, 2009 While waiting for the fourth member of the Planning Commission to amve, Community Development Director Bruce Nordquist updated the Planning Commission on the City's new garbage and recycling ordinance. Nordquist stated that the new ordinance takes effect immediately, although the private haulers have until December 31, 2009, to implement the changes. The three aspects of the new ordinance are: • Garbage and recycling will be collected at the curb on collection day. • ,Recycling will be collected every other week in a new container to be arranged through the hauler. • The City is divided into five hauling zones. Haulers will be contacting their customers to notify them of when the changes will take effect for that particulaz hauler. Planning Commissioner Keith Diekmann arrived at 7:02 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER The City of Apple Valley Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chair Churchill at 7:03 p.m. Members Present: Jeannine Churchill, David Schindler, Tom Melander and Keith Diekmann Members Absent: Ken Alwin, Frank Blundetto and Tim Burke Staff Present: Community Development Director Bruce Nordquist, City Planner Tom Lovelace, Associate City Planner Kathy Bodmer, City Attorney Sharon Hills, Assistant City Engineer David Bennett and Department Assistant Barbara Wolff 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA. Chair Churchill asked if there were any changes to the agenda. Hearing none she called for a motion. MOTION: Commissioner Diekmann moved, seconded by Commissioner Schindler, to approve the agenda. The motion carried 4-0. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JUNE 3, 2009 Chair Churchill asked if there were any changes to the minutes. There being none, she called for approval of the minutes. - MOTION: Commissioner Schindler moved, seconded by Commissioner Diekmann, to recommend approval of the meeting minutes for June 3, 2009. The motion can-ied 3-0. Commissioner Melander abstained. S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2009 agenda & minutes\061709mdoc 4. CONSENT ITEM --NONE-- 5. PUBLIC HEARING A. FSscher Sand and Aggregate Rezoning -Consideration of rezoning of property from "SG" (Sand and Gravel) to low and medium density residential. (WITHDRAWN) B. River Valley Church C.U.P. -Consider amended conditional use permit to allow for changes in church operations floor plans. City Planner Tom Lovelace stated that the petitioner is requesting approval of an amendment to an existing conditional use permit (C.U.P.) to-allow for the interior remodel of approximately 16,900 sq. ft. that will include a 4,300 sq. ft. youth auditorium and uses accessory to the new auditorium. Those will include a lobby, half-court gym, concession area, restrooms, meeting rooms, storage space, and a video production room. The property is located in the "BP" (Business Park) zoning district, which allows church and daycare uses as conditional uses, provided they are located in a multi-tenant building and occupy less than 50% of the total building floor area. The church currently has a 10,313 sq. ft. main auditorium and 4,796 sq. ft. family auditorium. The additiona14,300 sq. ft. youth auditorium will bring the total worship area to 19,409 sq. ft., which is approximately 31 % of the total azea of the building. Condition #2 of the existing C.U.P. referenced a floor plan as an attachment to the permit. Because the applicant is changing the floor plan, it will be necessary to amend the existing C.U.P. to reflect the revision. The master plan to the approved amended C.U.P. identified the youth auditorium, but left the proposed lobby azea vacant and did not include the half-court gymnasium. Lovelace asked for comments or questions from the Planning Commission. Chair Churchill, hearing no comments from the Commission, asked the applicant to come forwazd. Steve Wallick, architect of Vanman Architects and Builders, Inc. and representing the applicant, said the church has its programs during hours that are different from those of other businesses in the buildings surrounding the church. Because of the differing hours of operation, there haven't been parking conflicts during those times when the church is meeting. He said there are currently 341 parking spaces on the site. The calculation for the proposed plan is 324 spaces, so there is some built-in cushion. The church estimates that 30% of the kids that use the youth auditorium will be of driving age. This number could go as high as 43% and still meet the zoning requirements for on- site pazking. Rob Ketterling, lead pastor for River Valley Church, stated that only children use the family auditorium. The only adults are those that supervise the children. Chair Churchill asked for comments from the public. Hearing none she asked Mr. Lovelace if he had any closing remarks. S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2009 agenda & minutes\061709mdoc Lovelace asked the Commission to make a recommendation because there were no public comments. He said that the amended C.U.P approved in 2007 (Resolution 2007-155) required a shared parking agreement between the owners of Lot 1, Block 1, Valley Business Park 2na Addition, and Lots 1-2, Block 1, Valley Business Park 3Td Addition; this is condition # 4 in that C.U.P. However, the petitioner says the additional parking is not needed, so this condition could be omitted if the Commission prefers. Chair Churchill asked if there should be some modification to this condition that would protect the City if the uses changes in the future, rather than removing the condition altogether. Lovelace said if the church were to leave and the building were used as an office/warehouse, the businesses would have to be sized so that they only needed the existing parking on the site. Otherwise, across-parking agreement would be needed. Chair Churchill said that as long as the operations are conducted in conformance with the site plan, she thought it was reasonable not to require a cross parking easement agreement. If the use of the existing tenant changes so that the need for parking increases substantially, then the City could require the cross parking easement. Lovelace stated that the 50% requirement is based upon the worship area which is about 31% of the area. If uses or requirements change, a shared parking agreement would be necessary. Chair Churchill commented that if the three primary uses are maintained, the parking is adequate. She said that the Commission could. amend the resolution by striking condition #4 but require a new condition be written to the satisfaction of staff and the City Attorney that would guarantee that there will be adequate parking before a new conditional use permit will be required. City Attorney Sharon Hills agreed. Chair Churchill hearing no further comments closed the public hearing. Although it is not the practice of the Planning Commission to act on an item the same evening as its public hearing, the applicant has requested an action this evening. Chair Churchill asked for a motion. MOTION: Commissioner Melander moved, seconded by Commissioner Diekmann to recommend approval of the amended conditional use permit to include revised floor plans as exhibits to the permit and that condition #4 on the existing conditional use permit be revised with input by staff and the City Attorney's office to reflect the conditions as the Commission has discussed. The motion carried 4-0. 6. LAND USE/ACTION ITEMS A. El Toro Outdoor Patio -Consideration of site plan request to allow fora 22 seat outdoor dining area in conjunction with a restaurant. Associate City Planner Kathy Bodmer stated that the petitioner, El Toro Restaurant, is requesting site plan approval to operate an outdoor dining area on the east side of the north multiple tenant retail building at 14638 Cedar Avenue in the Cedar Marketplace development. The restaurant owner is requesting an amendment to the liquor license in order to serve alcohol and food on the. patio. The S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2009 agenda & minutes\061709mdoc pafio area is proposed to be 10' wide by approximately 85' long with seating for 22 patrons at 7 tables. No pazking or sidewalk would be removed to accommodate the patio area. An outdoor dining area is a permitted accessory use in the zoning district (PD-290, Zone 4) provided the conditions for an outdoor dining area are met. Outdoor dining areas require site plan review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council. The outdoor dining area section of the code states that the City may place reasonable conditions on the operation of the outdoor area in order to minimize impacts on adjacent residential properties. One of the issues related to an outdoor dining azea serving alcohol is that acfivity, smoke and noise maybe generated which negatively impacts the adjacent residential neighborhood. The back of the Cedar Mazketplace building is located approximately 40' from the Glazier Townhome buildings to the north. Rough scaling of the site plan indicates that the patio would be located approximately 75' from the townhomes to the north. Although a 6'-tall privacy fence separates the two properties, photos show there is a direct line of sight from the patio area to the second story of the adjacent townhomes. Caribou has a 22-seat outdoor patio azea, but its impact on adjacent properties is minimal because it is not a fidl-service restaurant. Other full-service restaurants have expressed an interest in constructing outdoor dining areas. The location of the site in relation to the surrounding residential properties may make the entire development unsuitable for outdoor dining if alcohol is being served. Bodmer spoke with the manager of the Glazier Townhomes directly to the north of the property and he commented that he is in favor of limiting the hours of operation. Based on issues identified by staff, a list of proposed conditions aze as follows: 1) No alcohol maybe served. on the patio. 2) No smoking shall be permitted on the patio. 3) No outdoor music or intercom system shall be used on the patio. 4) Service to the outdoor area shall end no later than 9 p.m. Sunday through Thursday, and 10 p.m. Friday and Saturday. Bodmer stated that the conditions aze very restrictive. The petitioner has told staff that if the City were to adopt the proposed conditions, he would probably not move forwazd with the project. Bodmer asked for comments and questions from the Planning Commission. Commissioner Melander asked if staff developed the four conditions. Bodmer confirmed this, stating that the condifions were in response to letters received from citizens. Commissioner Diekmann asked if staff was concerned about the additional impervious surface that will be created. Bodmer said no; it is a very small area and technically it is impervious now because it is a landscaped bed. S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2009 agenda & minutes\061709m.doc Assistant City Engineer David Bennett said there is a threshold of 0.2 acres where the City would require an offset infiltration area and this is well below that requirement. Chair Churchill stated that she is not concemed with big crowds since it is such a small area, although she is concerned about the proximity of the trash enclosure to the proposed eating area. Bodmer stated that staff is aware of the enclosure, but is not requiring the moving of the trash enclosure. This would be a business decision made by the restaurant. Chair Churchill asked for comments from the applicant. Alex Gomez, brother of the applicant Mazcos Gomez, was present in his brother's absence. Mr. Gomez stated that the owner can make sure the doors are closed on the trash enclosure and possibly cover over the top. Chair Churchill stated that she would like to speak about each of the proposed conditons. She asked Bodmer why staffwanted to prohibit the serving of alcohol on the patio. Bodmer said there is usually undesirable activity associated with drinking, generally noise and boisterous patrons. She believed most of the patrons that go to this establishment will have a drink with food because the restaurant does not a bar. Chair Churchill asked if smoking is permitted outdoors in an outdoor eating area. Bodmer replied yes, unless the City restricts it. The State Clean Air Act does not restrict outdoor smoking. Chair Churchill agrees with limitations on outdoor music and intercom systems considering the proximity of the restaurant to the residences. She asked if the patrons would need to move inside at 9 p.m: when the service stops. Bodmer stated that the service would end at 9 p.m., although patrons would be allowed to finish their meal outdoors. She commented that she-spoke with the petitioner this afternoon and he was comfortable with the time constraints listed in the conditions. Commissioner Melander commented that he had no trouble with conditions 3 and 4, but saw no reason to impose conditions 1 and 2. Commissioner Schindler said he is not comfortable with the close distance between the patio and the townhomes, especially if the townhomes are occupied by families. He said chilaren maybe in the 2°a-floor bedrooms. He said that the outdoor patio may attract more outdoor activity. He is not in favor of the proposal. Commissioner Diekmann commented that he has no problem with conditions 3 and 4. Also, without conditions 1 and 2, there is no sense in having the patio. Commissioner Melander commented that it is a small area and patrons will go to a different type of establishment if they want to be rowdy. He said it does not seem to be an unreasonable request. S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2009 agenda & minutes\061709m.dce Chair Churchill asked Bodmer to bring back the noise ordinances to the next meeting. She would like to see what protection the neighbors have already with existing ordinances. She stated that she would like to see the restaurant given the opportunity to thrive, but also be sensitive to the neighbors. Commissioner Diekmann asked Bodmer if the City was going to be in violation of the mandatory review period required by the state. Bodmer replied that a letter has been sent to the applicant indicating that the City will be extending the 60 day review period. Chair Churchill commented that if an outdoor seating area is to happen here, the City has to allow alcohol and smoking. Commissioner Diekmann asked if the City may impose a condition to revoke the C.U.P. if the noise became a problem. Mr. Gomez asked to address this issue. He stated he currently owns El Loro located in Burnsville and noise was also a concern of the City of Burnsville when he installed the outdoor patio at that location. He stated that he is very strict and their establishments are sit-down, family restaurants. They do not allow people to come in and get rowdy. They keep their restaurants nice, clean and quiet. He stated that it is not worth it to build the patio if they are unable to serve alcohol He thanked the Commission for their time and consideration. Chair Churchill thanked Mr. Gomez and commented that the restaurant has been very quiet on the occasions she has been visited. Bodmer stated that the restaurant in Burnsville is located at Cliff Road and Highway 13 if the Commission would choose to visit that location. Also, she stated that there is apparently an apartment building immediately behind that restaurant so it could make a good reference point. 7. OTHER BUSINESS A. Review of the Upcoming Schedule and other Updates Community Development Director Bruce Nordquist stated that the Commission will meet next month only on July 15, 2009, because of the Fourth of July holiday. 8. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further comments from the Planning Staff or Planning Commission, Chair Churchill asked fora motion to adjourn. MOTION: Commissioner Melander moved, seconded by Commissioner Schindler, to adjourn the meeting at 7:59 p.m. The motion carried 4-0. S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2009 agenda & minutes\061709m.doc