Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/18/1998CITY OF APPLE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 18,1998 1. CALL TO ORDER The City of Apple Valley Plannh~g Commission meeting was called to order by Chair Edgeton at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Karen Edgeton, Tim Burke, Tom Melander, Jce McNamara, Lou Clark, Frank Blundetto, Diane Nagler. Members Absent: None Staff Present: Rick Kelley, Kathy Bodmer, Tom Lovelace, City Attorney Mike Dougherty, Consulting Engineer Keith Gordon, Intern Maggie Milton, Nelda Werkmeister. Others Present: See sign-in sheet. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Clazk moved, seconded by Nagler, to approve the agenda. The motion carried 7 - 0. 3. APPROVAL OF NOVEMBER 4, 1998, MINUTES MOTION: Clark moved, seconded by Melander, to approve the minutes. The motion carried 6-0 (1 abstention -Nagler). 4. CONSENT ITEMS -None - 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning & Conditional Use Permit for Sand & Gravel Mining North of 160th Street by Fischer Sand & Aggregate Chair Edgeton opened the public hearing at 7:01 p.m. with the standard remarks. Assistant Planner Tom Lovelace introduced the item and showed an illustration ofthe site's mining and reclamation setbacks. Discussion occurred about the January 1, 1995, deadline for new sand and gravel mining applications in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) study area. Lovelace explained there is an exception for applicants who can prone the mining and reclamation will occur simultaneous with other mining operations within the study area. Kirsten Rojina of Sunde engineering, on behalf of the applicant Fischer Sand & Aggregate, described the proposed mhilng operation. She said there would be no pem~auent processing facilities on site, but crashing and screening would occur at the base of the active face with portable processing equipment. There would be no truck traffic onto 160th Street as a conveyor would be used to move the material to the existing processing facility directly north of the site. She went on to say that because the mining and grading plan is designed m allow immediate reclamation of the site upon completion, and because it is to occur in such a short time frame (two to four years), she didn't feel limiting active mining on the site to 25 acre cells was necessarily practical. Planning Commission Minutes November 18, 1998 Page 2 Blundetto asked how the proposed elevations relate to surrounding properties. Burke wanted to know if the conveying of materials would take place within the property boundaries. Mekmder queried about the time frame of completing all sand and grauel mining within the EIS study area. Tony Glcekel, an attorney representing Fischer Sand & Aggregate, pointed out that Fischer had stated their opposition to approving the Regatta resideNial subdivision at the time that issue was reviewed before the Planning Commission. Nagler asked if it would be possible to mine the site in 25-acre cells. Rojina responded that it would be possible, but that it doesn't make much sense for a site that size which you wish to redevelop in a short time flame. Blandetto recommended staying away from the 25-acre cells if it's mined so Fischer can get in and out as soon as possible. Blundetto went onto say he would like to haue a discussion regazding 25-acre cells on other mitring sites, however. City Attorney Mike Dougherty confirmed that the 25-acre cell requirement occurs within Fischer's current conditional use permit. Lovelace reviewed the sand and gmuel perfomraxrce standards. Staff is not recommending that trees be planted in conjunction with the bem~ing, however, because of the short time fi-ame proposed. Staff is also recommendug that access should be from Pilot Knob or C.R. #42, with no new access from 160th Street McNamara asked about the Vermillion River running through the property. Lovekuz expkuned that the Vermillion tributary is shown as a grcenway on the end use plan, and that there is not always water running through the tributary. The Deparunent of Natural Resources requires that the waterway exist, but manipulating its location is allowed. Edgeton requested a drawing for the next meeting showing the Regatta subdivision and the proposed sand and gravel mining side by side to look at the distances between the two. Richard Hervieux of 16005 Excel Way, Lakeville, stated several concerns, includurg: broken promises by Fischer rektting to dust control measures and noise; there must be something in it fnr the City of apple Valley; the City of Lakeville did not receive notice; he did not find the subject parcel in the EIS; the application was not filed prior to the 1995 deadline. He also stated that he had spoken to the U.S. Attorney's office. Terry Holtzworth of 15772 Finch Avenue said he was told by Pulte that the adjacent parcel was zoned residential. He went on to say he did not receive notice of the hearing, and that he had moved in in October. Edgeton asked Mr. Holtzworth if Pulte had advised him of the potential for sand and gravel mining in the azea, to which Holtzworth said "no'". Edgeton asked that the minutes from the Regatta discussion be pulled regarding Pulte's assurances. Matt Vaillant of 15952 Finch Lane stated that nothing was said by Pulte and nothing was on their diagrams. He asked when the proposed operation would start and what happens to Pulte for not notifying the home buyers. Edgeton requested a time line from Rojina for the next meeting. Stephanie Blocrel of 16005 Excel Way, Lakeville, said she already sees gravel pits out one side of her kitchen window. She also stated she couldn't keep her car clean or her house because of the dust. Planning Commission Minutes November 18, 1998 Page 3 Clazk said the letter submitted by Rechtzigels referred to a 500-foot buffer zone, and he wants to know where that 500-foot figure came from. Tom Scott of the attome~s office representing the City of Lakeville requested that the public hearing be continued because they haven't had an opportunity to look at the application closely and would like to comment. Denise Louis. of 15754 Hayes Trail asked if there would be gravel tracks on 160th Street, and what hours of operation are planned. Ann Gscheidmeier of 15755 Finch Avenue asked what recourse is available if the project goes beyond four years. She went onto say she looked at the "monstrous" berms to the north and found them unacceptable. Clark remarked he thouglrt there were enough questions to hold the public hearing open. Chad Roggeman of 15897 Finch Lane said he's been in his home since April and would not have bought it had he known what he knows now. Tom Long of 16074 Excel Way, Lakeville, said he doesn't get to sleep in now because of the noise, and this will only make it worse. Blandetto expressed concern about enforcement of conditional uses and moving equipment about. Dougherty explained that time frames could be addressed through the consent of the landowner. Richard Hervieux asked if Fischer fails to comply, who do I sue. Nagler asked about options if Fischer does not comply; and Dougherty stated misdemeanor charges could be filed, the mitring pemut could be revoked. MOTION: Blundetto moved, seconded by McNamara, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 5-2 (Nagler, Clark). Chair Edgeton called fora 5-minute recess. The meeting reconvened at 8:37. B. Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning, Preliminary Plat, Site PlanlBwlding Permit Authorization for 168 Apartment Units in Phase I by Stephen Haight Construction and Pahl Farms Chair Edgeton opened the public hearing with the standazd remarks. Assistant Planner Kathy Bodmer introduced the item. She noted that this project also requires a conditional use permit as proposed, so another notice of public hearing will be published and the item will be reviewed in its entirety at the next meeting. Nagler noted that the forester s report was not included in the packet, and that she would like to see more details about the setback requiremerrts and green space for the next meeting. MOTION: Blundetto moved, seconded by Burke, to continue the public hearing until all appropriate notices are completed. Motion carried 7-0. Peter Paron of 15820 Gallery Avenue asked ifthe same residents would be notified. Planning Commission Minutes November 18, 1998 Page 4 C. Comprehensive Plan Update Planning Consultant Ann Perry with SEH reviewed the process followed to date. She said the most important was to identify community values and issues and how to translate those to land use approaches. Four strategies were identified: 1) The plan adopted in the'80's doesn't need to change a great deal; 2) Reinforce neighborhood service. areas; 3) Reinforce public and private investment in downtown and provide for more intense uses; 4) Regazding undeveloped property in the South Central Area, try to utilize more innovative pku'ning approaches which looks at mixed uses both within a site, and within a building. Perry displayed overheads showing neighborhood service areas and the South Central Planning Area. She also noted the proposal to change the number of land use categories in trying to revive the comprehensive plan as a policy document. Definitions will be included in the final draft of the Comprehensive Plan. Nagler pointed out that Dodd and C.R. #42 should be designated a neighborhood service azea. Also, on page 65, the last sentence regarding greenv~ay need to be completed. Lovelace addressed the scattered site evaluations. McNamara stepped down prior to discussion of Site #4, McNamara Property. In regazd to site #4, Kelley stated staff felt "LD" would be most appropriate because of the street connection to Footbridge Way. McNamara returned prior to discussion of Site #5. Chair Edgeton asked from comments from the public. Huel Scherrer of 100 Cimarron Court commented on natural resource elements and his recommendation to incorporate those into a separate chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. He commented on his desire to enhance wetland protection, discrepancies in wetland inventories, and the suggestion to create a nattn~al resource land designation. Richazd Koontz of 260 Cimaaon Road referred to the color diagrams submitted by Mr. Scherrer and questioned the computations of the land's capability to support the proposed density of units based on wetlands, slope and setback requirements. John Bergman of 14691 Gutluie Avenue if more current demographic information could be included in the text. Chuck Habiger, representing Joel Watmd, stated Mr. Watrud's preference that the designation of site #9, which he owns, not be changed so that variances and modifications aze not needed. Roy Brandenburg of 394 Cimarron Road stated the only people to suffer will be the homeowners in the area if the developer of site #9 (Palomino East Apartments) pushes the density to the maximum. There was some discussion about the moratorium currendy in place affecting multi-family parcels north of County Road #42 and those with slopes exceeding 12%. Nagler asked for clarification of the wetland inventory discrepancy referred to by Mr. Schemer. Melander asked that density calculations be addressed if much of the properly is water, for example. Perry said p. 50 provides framing for what densities might be appropriate. Planning Commission Minutes November 18,1998 Page 5 7-0. MOTION: Burke moved, seconded by Blundetto, to keep the public hearing open. Motion carried D. Amendment to Zoning Ordinance Regarding Revised Restaurant Definitions Bodmer introduced the item. Commissioners discussed the significance of reusable dinnerware, restaurant trends, and the proposed additions to the ordinance. MOTION: Clark moved, seconded by Nagler, to reconuneud acceptance of the ordinance provisions as submitted by staff. Motion carried 7-0. 6. LAND USE/ACTION ITEMS -None - 7. OTI3ER BUSINESS -None - 8. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Clark moved, seconded by Burke, to adjourn the meeting at 10:55 p.m. Motion carried 7-0.