Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/08/1997CITY OF APPLE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES January 8, 1997 1. CALL TO ORDER The City of Apple Valley Platviing Commission meeting was called to order at 7:04 p.m.. Members Present: Alan Felkner, Frank Blundetto, Diane Nagler, Paul Oberg, Marcia Gowling, and Joe McNamara. Members Absent: Karen Edgeton. Staff Present: Rick Kelley, Keith Gordon, and Mike Dougherty. Others Present: See the sign-in sheet. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Chair Felkner asked Staff and the Cocrunission members if they had any changes to Che proposed agenda. There being none, he called for its approval. MOTION: Member Oberg moved, seconded by Member Nagler, to approve the agenda as submitted. The motion carried 6 - 0. 3. APPROVAL OF DECEMBER 4, 1996 MINUTES Chair Felkner asked Staff and the Commission members if they had any changes or corrections to the proposed nnnutes subnutted in the packet. Convnissioner McNamara noted that near the bottom of page 3 the sentence concerning the microwave liiilc should read, "projection" instead of "protection." There being no other corrections, the Chair called for approval of the miimtes as amended. MOTION. Member Gowling moved, seconded by Member Oberg, to approve the minutes as amended. The motion carried 6 - 0. 4- CONSENT ,ITEMS -None - MOTION: Member Blundetto moved, seconded by Member Edgeton, to approve the Consent Agenda. The motion carried 6 - 0. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS - Noue - Planning Commission Minutes January 8, 1997 Page 2 6. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Fischer Market Place EAW Community Development Director Rick Kelley briefly introduced this item and noted that the proposed Fischer Market Place falls under a 'Snandatory" environmental assessment worksheet category (EAW), because the project would include over 300,000 square feet of building area for conunercial uses. The EAW is currently under its public review process which runs For 30 days. During this 30 day period, the EAW needs to be discussed at a public meeting, and Apple Valley's adopted procedure has always been to place the EAW ou a regularly scheduled Planning Conmussion meeting for discussion. hr addition to any public cornticnts that might be received at this meeting, written comments are received through out the 30 day review period. Mr. Kelley then turned the presentation on the EAW over to the representatives of the Fischer Market Place development. Meg McMonigal of MFRA, hicorporatcd, introduced herself as the pla~mer hired by the project proposed to prepare the EAW. She noted that the 83.8 acres of the proposed development would be constructed in two phases. Phase I would contain 254,000 square feet of building area, and Phase FI would corrtain 456,000 square feet of building area. The Minnesota State Environmental Quality Board (EQB) rules require that any proposed project over 300,000 square feet of building area iu a Class II city must have au EAW prepared for it. Apple Valley is a Class II city based on its population. Ms. McMonigal noted that at the conclusion of this development, there would actually be more greenspaee on the property than currently exists, since it has been utilized for sand and gravel muiiug operations for the past 40 to 50 yeais. She noted that the EAW identifies a deep water well on the site which would either be sealed in accordance with state rules, or sold to the City for use in connection to the ntiuncipaL water supply. There are also six existing underground petroleum tanks on the southwest corner of the site that were used for fueling proposes for the mining operations, and all of these taailcs would be removed. Commissioner Oberg asked if during the analysis for the EAW if anyone contacted Williams Brothers Pipeline Company. Ms. McMonigal stated that she had just received the letter from Curt Proud today with some of the concerns that Williams Brothers Pipeline has. Commissioner Oberg asked if issues concerning the tank farm acid the pipelines should not have been included in the EAW analysis. Community Development Director Rick Kelley noted that the worksheets filled out for EAW are a standard form prepared by the EQB. The City may not deviate from that form, and the form is what lists what is considered to be important or not important. Mr. Kelley noted, however, that one of the reasons for having a 30 day comment period for either verbal or written corrunents is for issues, such as the ones Williams Pipeline has raised, to be incorporated into the process- Planning Commission Minutes January 8, 1997 Page 3 City Attorney Mike Dougherty reiterated that the City must follow a closely prescribed process in doing an EAW. Commissioner Nagler asked about the 3:1 slope referenced in the EAW and in the letter from Williams Pipeline. She asked whether or not that slope is the ratio as existing or as proposed. Rick Kelley and City Engineer Keith Gordon. stated that the 3:1 slope is the proposed slope which would exist upon completion of the project. Jun Benshoof of Benshoof and Associates introduced himself to the Commission as the traffic engineer hired by the developer to prepare traffic projections. Mr. Benshoof briefly went over the level of service categories of the varying intersections along County Road 42 and Galaxie Avenue from the proposed development area. He noted that hi all cases the intersections would be at level of service "D" or better. He stated that in the metro area "D" is considered to be the minimum level of acceptable delay and congestion. He st<tited that this level of service or better exists for 1997, 2002, and 2007. Mr. Benshoof Then briefly touched upon expected intersection improvemeirts along County Road 42 that would continue to keep congestion levels at the minimum acceptable amount. Mr. Benshoof also discussed the intenial street improvements such as 147th Street, Flagstaff, and Foliage Avenue. The construction of these imerual streets would occur with the various phases of development to provide alternate routes, which could minimize the impact on the Cedar Avenue and County Road 42 nitersection. Mr. Benshoof also noted that while not identified in the EAW, other potential improvements to the Cedar Avenue/Comity Road 42 intersection could be implemented in the future to keep traffic congestion at acceptable levels. Commissioner Blundet[o questioned information contained in Figure 22.6. h~ particular, he asked a question regarding the temporary access onto Galaxie Avenue and the relationslvp between the phasing of development and the three separate traffic numbers given for each intersection, particularly the uiterseetioii of Galaxie Avenue and future 147th Street. It was explained that the three different mm~bers related to traffic for 1997, 2002, and 2007. in some cases, certain turning movements were listed as not applicable because other legs of the street had not been installed az those particular years. Chair Felkner asked if Glen VanWonner at SEH (the City's traffic camsultant) had looked at the EAW and the munbers contained therein. Rick Kelley stated that he had looked at those numbers and had some minor comments. The Connnissioners asked that the fidl text of Mr. VanWormer's comments be included for their information on the next Pla~ming Co~mrtission agenda. Curt Proud of Williams Pipeline approached the podium. He stated that he appreciated comments made by the Commissioners concernhig the importance of keeping comrnunications open between parties and adjacent property owners. He noted that the EQB is also the agency which would review any new pipeline routes that Williuns or awry other pipeline company nught propose. He stated that he felt the location of existhng pipelines across the proposed Fischor Market Place development Planning Commission Minutes January 8, 1997 Page 4 should be indicated on one of the maps contained within the EAW. He also referred to the Letter he subnvtted to the City dns evening that contains some additional comments. It was noted that the comment period for the EAW closes on January 75th, 1997. Once the comment period closes, staff will ieview all comments and prepare a fording of fact for consideration upon an upcoming council agenda. This finding of fact would indicate that either the information contained within the EAW is sufficient for the City to proceed with development approvals and that a full Enviromnental Impact Statement (EIS) is not necessary, or, in the alternative, that issues have been raised which would require the preparation of a complete EIS before final approvals could be considered. Commissioners asked that they receive a copy of the findings once adopted by the City Council. 7. LAND USE/ACT10N ITEMS A- Amendment to Commercial Zoning District Language Community Development Director Rick Kelley briefly outlined die reasons that proposed amendments are being considered and what those amendments entail Essentially, information within the preamble/intuit portion of each zoning district is proposed to be amended to refer to policies contauned within the Comprehensive PL and eliminate the more generic references to such things as "Retail Use," "Limited Business," "Genera] Business," or "Shoppiig Center." Conmtissioner Oberg referred to the change in the language in the Limited Business zoimig district, specifically as it related to the inclusion of "Garden Centers" to the couditiaial use lisi Commissioner Oberg stated that he continues to believe that the inclusion of a garden store in the Limted Business zone would open the door wide open for other retail uses. A general discussion ensued concerning the preamble language. Commissioner McNamara noted that criteria has now been included concerning traffic generation which will help giude the Commission in the future about what is an appropriate or inappropriate use. Mr.' Kelley noted that Staff has reviewed the uses, either existing or proposed, within the different categories, and that they arc all consistent with the traffic nwnbcrs which have now been included in the preamble sections. Mr. Kelley also noted the history of the inclusion of the "nursery and greenhouse" i2 the Limited Business zone, and noted that it is very clear that a full garden center is what had beui expected when this amendment was made many years ago. Commissioner Oborg stated that he sril] felt it appropriate to striltc the garden store use from the Limited Business category. Commissioner Nagler noted that in none of the other permitted uses that "ancillary items for sale" seems to make it clear that some retail uses are expected for almost any use. Planning Commission Minutes January 8, 1997 Page 5 City Attorney Mike Dougherty noted that almost every coirunercial use has some type of retail component in it. For instance, for medical offices, an optometrist typically will sell eye glasses, and most physicians can prescribe and, iu fact, often sell or provide certain amounts of prescription drags directly to their patients. Also, restaurants are essentially purely retail uses in that they are selling a product which. is consumed on the premises. Conmiissioner Blundetto noted that businesses are constantly changing and evolving He noted a change in the motor fuel sales industry where convenience grocery is almost always now associated with iti, and that in addition to sellinn food, many restauuants sell branded souveiurs. He postulated that it might be appropriate to include hi the preamble something that deals with a limited retail component with all uses contained within that zone. Mike Dougherty noted that one of the greatest difficulties that would arise in this approach is how to measure the amount o£the retail component Is it 1°/u, 2%, l0°/q 20% or greater? He said that, instead, this particular approach bas tried to measure the impacts associated with the genera}ly heavier use retail operations. By establislung a traffic number, the City can get at what it is most concerned with, which is the impacts of die use. Commissioner Blundetto suggested that perhaps some modifications ui the definition section of the ordinance might be appropriate. Commissioner Nagler stated that she still had a question on the "ancillary retail items" within some of the districts. Commissioner McNamara stated that he was not oi~ the Conmussion when the issue of the Lyndale Garden site came up. He stated that he thinks reference to the Comprehensive Plan gives the Co~runission, Staff, and Council Members the greatest amount of guidance. He thinks that having tight definitions, however, could cause problems ui the fiiture as busn~ess and industry changes to adapt to a changing world. He said it is important to have some minimum element of vagueness to allow for interpretation in the future, or else the ordinance would have to be amended constantly. Commissioner Blwidetto stated that they are wrestling with a similar issue for the proposed gas station with a convenience grocery retail component in an industrial area. He stated that he world want to see language which allows a fair amount of discretion on the part of the City tb make these types of ndings. Commissioner Oberg stated that he knows that t}tis is a tough issue to deal with, and that crafting appropriate ordinance language is going to be difficult for Staff The general consensus among Commission members were that they were not ready to move tlvs item fonvard, afid felt that a work session would be appropriate. Rick Kelley noted that Febmary 12 (the second Wednesday in Febmary) was upon. The Commission agreed that a work session, beginning at 6:00 with a box lunch, would be appropriate in order for them to discuss this item fiirther. Planning Commission Minutes January 5,1997 Page. 6 8. OTHER BUSINESS None - 9. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Member Blundetto moved, seconded by Member Co~~ding, to adjourn the meeting. The motion carried 6 to 0. The meeting adjourned at 8:09 p.m.