Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/01/2002CITY OF APPLE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MAY 1, 2002 1. CALL TO ORDER The City of Apple Valley Planning Commission meeting was called to Order by Chair Kazen Edgeton at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Karen Edgeton, Tom Melander, Jeannine Churchill, John Bergman, David Schindler, and Jim Hadley Members Absent: Tim Burke Staff Present: City Engineer Keith Gordon, City Attorney Sharon Hills, Community Development Director Rick Kelley, City Planner Tom Lovelace, Assistant Planner Kathy Bodmer, and Assistant Planner Mazgazet Milton Dykes 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Edgeton asked if there were any changes to the agenda. There being none, she called for its approval. MOTION: Churchill moved, seconded by Hadley to approve the. agenda. The motion carried 6-0. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF APRIL 17, 2002 Chair Edgeton asked if there were any changes to the minutes. There being none, she called for its approval. MOTION: Churchill moved, seconded by Hadley, to approve the minutes as presented. The motion carried 6-0. 4. CONSENT ITEMS -None. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. South Suburban Evangelical Free Church -Interim Use Permit Assistant Planner Maggie Milton Dykes presented the request from South Suburban Evangelical Free Church for an interim use permit to use asingle- family residence as a classroom facility. The subject property is located at 5973 - 126t° Street W. The permit is requested for three (3) years. Dykes presented a summary of the request, as outlined in the staff report. The Church is experiencing tremendous growth and cannot accommodate all of its programs in its current location. The Church expects to expand its existing structure by 2005. The Church bought the subject property, which is located adjacent to the church site. The single-family residence is zoned as "PD315" and does not allow for classrooms. Dykes reported that on Apri13, 2002, the Planning Commission held a public hearing for an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and a rezoning of the subject azea. However, the Planning Commission was concerned that if the property were rezoned, the City would not be able to place conditions on the use of the property, such as parking of cars, maintenance of the house, and future use of the site. The Commission was uncomfortable with recommending the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezoning, and directed that staff determine whether an interim use permit could be issued. Dykes reported that an interim use permit is an acceptable alternative to the previous request. Commissioner Melander asked if there would be any overnight stays and if the interim use permit were granted, could it be extended beyond the 3 years requested. Todd Wallace, the Church's Chairman, stated that overnight stay would only be if a missionary were in town and there would be no overnight stays for youths without consent from the neighbors and adult supervision. Mr. Wallace also stated that once the Church expansion is completed, the home will be turned back into asingle-family residence as it originally was. Dykes stated that the interim use pemrit could be extended beyond the 3 yeazs requested. Edgeton opened the public hearing with the standard remarks. There being no comments from the public, Edgeton closed the hearing with the standard remarks. MOTION: Melander moved to recommend approval of an interim use permit to allow asingle-family house located at 5973 - 126' Street W., to accommodate insfitufional functions, such as classrooms, by South Suburban Evangelical Free Church with the following condifions: 1. The interim use permit will be valid until the Church's primary stmcture is expanded or December 31, 2005, whichever occurs fast. 2. Members of the Church using the subject house must either park in the Church parking lot or use the driveway of the house. The members shall not park on 126x' Street West. 3. The Church must maintain both the exterior and interior of the subject house and property so that the house appears to have full- time residents. The Church is responsible for all lawn mowing, snow removal, painting, and other routine maintenance. 4. The Church shall not construct a driveway across the subject property connecting its driveway to 126"" Street. 5. All Church events must be properly supervised by responsible adults. 6. The house shall be used by the Church only and only for Church- related activities, classes or functions. 7. If the Church rents or sells the subj ect property to any other organization or individual, the interim use permit shall automatically terminate. Churchill seconded. The motion passed 6-0. B. Small Area Plan -Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Central Village Mixed Use Plan Tom Lovelace, City Planner, gave a presentation regarding the Small Area Plan, as outlined in the staff report. Mr. Lovelace reported that the small azea plan site encompasses approximately 65 acres of undeveloped land located in the southeast quadrant of the City's commercial area. The Hartford Group's Legacy Project is also included in the srnall area plan. Lovelace reported the City requested and received a matching grant from the Metropolitan Council in the amount of $16,000, to allow for the preparation of a small area plan fora 65-acre portion. The grant, along with the City's match, was used to hire a consultant. Lovelace reported that members of the consulting firm, Metropeligo, are present today to speak on behalf of the project. Metropeligo has worked with staff and a Committee over the past three months in the prepazation of an initial site analysis, market analysis, and preliminary site design for the site in question. The goal of the City was to demonstrate how smart growth principles could be successfully implemented on an undeveloped suburban site. These principles included the following: • Create a range of housing opporhmities and choices; • Create a walkable neighborhood environment; • Create distinctive, attractive places with a strong sense of place; • Provide mixed land uses and not a mix of land uses; and • Provide a variety of transportation choices. At a Committee meeting on Apri122"d, the Committee approved the "Mixed-Use Development Plan" with the following conditions. 1. That the one-way loop of 153rd Street West be completed with time deferred assessments to match development; 2. That Galaxie Avenue be made as pedestrian friendly as possible; and 3. That a set of market sensitive and flexible special district development requirements and performance standards be developed, with the understanding that the landowners have opportunity to review them. At this point in the meeting, Lovelace asked representatives from Metropeligo to speak on behalf of the project. Aaron Parker presented a market summary of the project, as outlined in the staff report. Steve Quam also spoke on behalf of Metropeligo. Several members of the Commission had questions and concems about traffic. Glen VanWormer, traffic consultant on the project, gave a presentation on traffic issues and answered concerns raised by the Commissioners. Community Development Director Rick Kelley stated that traffic is an important issue and needs to be thoroughly addressed. Edgeton opened the public hearing with the standard remarks. Randy Peterson, a landowner around 153" and Galaxie, addressed the Planning Commission. He stated that until yesterday, he was not aware of the small area plan. As an owner of part of the land, he feels he should have been contacted and made aware of the City's plans. Mr. Peterson also quesfioned how assessments for road changes would be paid. Commissioner Hadley asked Planning staff why landowners were not contacted and included in the process. City Planner Lovelace stated that landowners that had vacant land within the 65-acre area were included during the initial phase of the project.. Mr. Lovelace stated that the City would also be looking at rezoning the property, which would require notification of all property owners within 350 feet. Community Development Director Rick Kelley stated that landowners would be part of the next implementation phase. hi regard to road assessments, Kelly stated that assessments will be implemented over a number of years and that because of the nature of the development, the City will also be evaluating other mechanisms to cover costs, such as grants, etc. Edgeton closed the public hearing with the standazd remarks. Lovelace reported that it is the policy of the Planning Commission not to make a recommendation on the evening of a public hearing, but for this particulaz project, staff are requesting that the Commission deviate from it's normal practice and are recommending approval of the project at tonight's meeting. MOTION: Commissioner Hadley recommended the approval of the Apple Valley Central Village Small Area Plan , as recommended by the Small Area Plan Committee. Churchill seconded. The motion passed unanimously 6-0. C. The Legacy of Apple Valley City Planner Tom Lovelace reported that The Legacy's rezoning, plat plan, and EAW was completed. The City is now determining if an EIS is needed or not. He expects to have this completed by the next City Council meeting. 6. LAND USE/ACTION ITEMS A. Setback Variance for Sport Court and Retaining Wall Assistant Planner Kathy Bodmer presented the variance request as outlined in the staff report. Vince and Debbie Terlizzi request variances for a basketball court and retaining wall that are located closer than five feet (5') from the rear property line. The plan that has been submitted indicates that the basketball court is located 2.5 feet from the reaz property line and the boulder retaining wall is on the property line. Bodmer reported that the Planning Commission reviewed this request at its April 17, 2002, meeting. The Commission requested that the Terlizzis meet with their neighbors, the Bestuls, and see if their concerns and issues could be worked out before the Commission makes a decision. Since the previous Planning Commission meeting, the Terlizzi's and Bestuls are in presently in negotiations. However, the issue of the variance in relation to the variance request s611 remains for the Commission. Bodmer reported that in order for the City to grant a variance, the following must be determined: 1. Special conditions applying to the structures or land in question are particular to such property, or immediately adjoining property. 2. The special conditions do not generally apply to other land or structures in the district. 3. The granting of the proposed variance will not be contrary to the intent of this ordinance and comprehensive plan. 4. The granting of the variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. Bodmer reported that staff is recommending that the variance for the retaining wall be granted due to the fact that the wall supports the sidewalk and steps that lead down to the basketball court. Relocating the wall five feet from the property line would require extensive regrading of the property. It is also possible that extensive regrading of the yard would result in more springs being disturbed resulting in increased water discharge onto the neighboring property. In the case of the sport court, Bodmer reported that staff is less inclined to recommend approval of the variance. The Terlizzis could alter, the basketball court so that it complies with zoning by cutting it back 2.5 feet. Staff has determined that the Terlizzis would not be deprived of reasonable use of their property by cutting back the court. Commissioner Bergman stated that he is having trouble approving a cutback of the sport court and that it does create a hardship of the land due to the landswell. The applicant, Debbie Terlizzi, spoke on behalf of the project. She reported that she and the Bestuls have been working together trying to reach an agreement. She also stated reasons why the sport court should not be cutback and would be a hardship on the land. MOTION: Commissioner Bergman moved to recommend approval of a variance for a reduced setback for the boulder retaining wall from the required five feet to zero feet based upon the hardship created by the steep slope of the rear yard with the following conditions: a. The Terlizzis shall submit documentation of agreement of a survey line. b. The Terlizzis shall modify the boulder retaining wall as necessary so as not to encroach onto neighboring property. In the alternative, the encroaching boulders may remain unaltered if a written agreement is reached with the owners of the property (the Bestuls) at 13945 Eden Wood Court, which authorizes the encroachment onto their property, a coy of which shall be given to the City. c. The Terlizzis shall install drain file along the back of the fence on the rear of the property line, and all drain files under the fence shall be connected into this line and drain to the southwest. d. If variance is granted, any changes to the retaining wall shall first be approved by the City to ensure approval is maintained. Also approval of the variance request for reduced rear yard setback from 5 feet to 2.5 feet for the basketball court because of the hazdship created by the steep slopes. Melander seconded. The motion passed 6-0. B. Antenna -Conditional Use Permit for Additional Height City Planner Tom Lovelace presented the request for a conditional use pernut for an antenna in Hagemeister Pazk, as outlined in the staff report. Voicestream Wireless, the applicant, is proposing to install a sixty (60) foot communications tower in the park. The zoning code requires a conditional use permit for any structure exceeding forty (40) feet in "P" (Institutional) zoning.. Voicestream is proposing to remove the exisfing light pole currently used to illuminate the outdoor hockey rink, and replace it with a sixty (60) foot monopole that will contain the rink lights and wireless phone antennas, along with some equipment cabinets. An eight-foot high chain link fence topped with barbed wire was initially proposed to be installed around the monopole and cabinets. Because of its location in a city park, the Planning Commission and staff are uncomfortable with recommending the use of bazbed wire. This was discussed at the Commission's April 1T~ meeting, during which a public hearing was held for this issue. During the public hearing on April 1 Ts, members of the community expressed several concems they had in relation to the antenna being installed in a City pazk. At tonight's meeting, Lovelace addressed all of the concerns that were raised by the community, including the issue of the Park Committee's approval of this project. Commissioner Hadley questioned why a conditional use permit was needed. Lovelace responded that a permit is needed because the additional height serves a use other than the City's. Commissioner Schindler questioned the fencing around the cell tower. Steve Carlson, the broker representing Voicestream, commented that the fencing is there for vandalism protection. Commissioner Schindler questioned why was the Park site picked for proposed tower. Carlson responded that the locaflon was picked because of the volume of calls being dropped in that area, and because of the existing light pole in the park. Commissioner Bergman questioned the containment of the equipment and stated that he would like to see the area modified to contain a shed. Edgeton reminded the Commissioners that the request is regarding the additional height needed for the pole, not the use of the pole itself. Dan Boomhower, a resident inclose proximity to the Park, presented a pefifion signed by 391 residents in opposition to the antenna. He had previously submitted a petition signed by 14 residents opposing the tower. Commissioner Schindler stated that he didn't have a problem with the additional eight (8) feet of the pole but wanted it to go on record that he does not support this type of use for a City park. Commissioner Bergman also stated that he would like to see the money the City receives from this project is used for development of the Park instead of being put into the City's general fund. Community Development Director Rick Kelly stated that the reason for the money going into the City's general fund is to allow the City the discretion to use the money where it is most needed. MOTION: Comrissioner Bergman motioned to recommend approval of the condifional use permit to allow for the installation of a sixty (60) foot cell phone communications tower in place of an existing hockey rink light pole in Hagemeister Park, subject to any and all condifions set forth in an agreement between.the City of Apple Valley and Voicestream Wireless. Commissioner Hadley seconded the mofion. The motion passed unanimously. 7. OTHER BUSINESS 8. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Churchill moved, seconded by Melander, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 6-0.