Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/04/2006CITY OF APPLE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 4, 2006 1. CALL TO ORDER The City of Apple Valley Planning Commission meeting was called to Order by Secretary David Schindler at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: David Schindler, Keith Diekmann, Frank Blundetto, Tim Burke, and Thomas Helgeson Members Absent: Tom Melander and Jeannine Churchill Staff Present: Acting Community Development Director Tom Lovelace, City Attorney Sharon Hills, Associate City Planner Margaret Dykes, and City Engineer Colin Manson, Planning Intem Nick Meyers Commissioner Blundetto introduced Danny Sarno. Samo will be opening an Italian restaurant in Apple Valley in the near future. Sarno addressed the Commission and stated that he is excited to become part of the Apple Valley community. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Secretary Schindler asked if there were any changes to the Agenda. There being none, he called for approval of the Agenda. MOTION: Commissioner Burke moved, seconded by Blundetto, to approve the Agenda. The motion carried 5-0. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 20, 2006 Secretary Schindler asked of there were any changes to the minutes. There being none, he called for approval of the Minutes. MOTION: Commissioner Helgeson moved, seconded by Blundetto, to approve the minutes of the September 20, 2006, meeting. The motion carried 5-0. 4. CONSENT ITEMS None. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Jolene Addition - Consider a Replat of an Existing Single Family Lot Into Two Single Family Lots Secretary Schindler opened the public hearing with the standard comments. Planning Intern Nick Meyers presented the request from Johnson-Reiland Construction Company to split a 30,991 sq. ft. corner lot into two lots. The parcel is located at 6525-133~a Street. The proposed lots would be 15,250 for the corner lot and 15,740 for the interior lot. Meyers reported that the Comprehensive Plan guides the development of this parcel for "LD" (Low Density Residential at 0-6 units per acre). The proposed lot split is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation, however, when the Comp Plan evaluated parcels that were expected to be further subdivided, this parcel was not included as part of that inventory. Meyers reported that the preliminary plat indicates that the existing parcel will be subdivided into two parcels. Drainage and utility easements will be required to be depicted on the final plat along the property lines in accordance with the subdivision regulations. The original lot survey for the parcel showed aright-of--way for 132na Street, which has since been vacated. Meyers stated that Lot 1 will be a new parcel available for construction for a new single-family home. The lot contains a buildable footprint area of 7,000 sq. ft. A single family home will easily fit within the footprint area. The maximum impervious area allowed on the lot will be 5,509 sq. ft. It appears that a low area presently exists on the northwest corner of the lot. Staff is recommending that this area be addressed as part of the site grading. The remaining portion of the site is relatively flat requiring minimal grading. As land becomes scarce in Apple Valley, there will be more requests to subdivide lots in fully established neighborhoods that may have been initially passed over for development. The City will need to consider the existing neighborhood when evaluating these types of requests. The Comp Plan states that "The City intends to support the preservation of existing neighborhood character by requiring the type and intensity of new infill development to be consistent with that which already exists." Secretardy Schindler asked if anything needs to be done in relation to the right-of--way on 132° Street. Meyers stated that other than the draining and utility easements, nothing else needs to be done. Secretary Schindler also asked about park dedication. Meyers stated that because a new single family parcel is being created, money will be required For park dedication since the new lot will place demand on the park system. Commissioner Blundetto asked if there were any issues with the vacation. Meyers responded there are none. Commissioner Helgeson asked if the lot located directly to the north of the subject property was subdivided previously. Meyers stated that he would find out and report back at the next meeting. Secretary Schindler asked if anyone from the public would like to address the Commission, and if so, they may do so at this time. David Bailey, 6541-133rd Street W., stated that he checked with the Better Business Bureau and found that the applicant, Johnson-Reiland Company, has a satisfactory rating with no complaints. Bailey asked staff why the proposed lot split is already being referred to as the Jolene Addition when the current plat states it is Lot 1, Block 5, Greenleaf 2"a Addition. Acting Community Development Director Tom Lovelace responded that when a plat is proposed to be subdivided, anew name has to be created. If the plat is approved, the final plat will be recorded with the new name. Bailey stated that he is concerned that this request is a done deal and that the Planning Commission and staff have been withholding information. He asked if any of the Planning Commissioners have looked at and walked the property. He stated that there is a drainage problem presently and wanted to know if part of the plan was to correct it if the subdivision is approved. Bailey also wanted to know what size of house could be located on the lot and if the house is required to be consistent with the existing neighborhood. Commissioner Blundetto responded that he is compelled to respond to the accusations from Bailey and that no one is devious and that the project is not a done deal. Bailey continued to say that he didn't realize how large the lot is and that he would hate to see the neighborhood change. Secretary Schindler added that any property owner is welcome to seek a land use action with their property, but it still has to come before the Planning Commission for a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council has final approval. Schindler added that the Planning Commission follows the approved guidelines for every project and does due diligence for every project: John Wagner, 13201 Flagstaff Avenue, stated that he would like to know more details about the project such as how many feet will the home be located from his home, are building plans available, and how will the lot split affect right-of--way. He stated that the lot split will change his lifestyle and might adversely affect his property value. Wagner would also like to know what trees will have to be removed as a result of the lot split and what are the stakes that are currently located in the yard. Brad Reiland, presenting the applicant, stated that the stakes presently in the yard are a survey of the property boundaries. Commissioner Helgeson commented that it is not uncommon for property owners to encroach. Mike Champion, 6615-133`° Street W., stated that he enjoys the property the way it currently exists. He stated that if the City didn't think it was appropriate for the lot to be smaller when it was developed, then why is it appropriate to subdivide it now. He stated that there are no pins in the back to determine the property line. Champion 3 wanted to know how the lot split would affect his current utilities and how would it affect value to existing homeowners. Champion added that it would be sad to see the lot changed. Commissioner Blundetto stated that in response to Champion's comment earlier about pins not being available to determine the property line, surveyors can identify property lines whether a pin is available or not. It is public information and is identifiable by standard surveying practices. Acting Community Development Director Tom Lovelace stated that staff does not know if there is an existing utility easement or any other easement that wasn't vacated, but when staff proceeds with the vacation, it will be identified. Lovelace added that it will be the responsibility of the applicant to adjust and pay for this service. No public utilities are there presently, only private utilities such as phone and cable. City Attorney Sharon Hills stated that the vacation would be directed by the City Council and the applicant would need to work with the utility companies to have them moved and relocated. Hills added that the Planning Commission would need to address the issue of the lot being buildable with the current utility easement. David Weaver, 13280 Flagstaff Avenue, asked if 132nd Street W. was given to property owners after it was decided that the street would not be put through. Hills responded that right-of--way that is dedicated but not used and is subsequently vacated by the City goes back to the entity that originally dedicated the right-of--way. Wayne Last, 13260 Flagstaff Avenue, stated that he can walk to 4 or 5 parks within 5 minutes from the subject property. He stated that the subject parcel is also like a park and that subdividing the property would be like taking away a park. Last also heard that the subject property could be a rental property and he would be opposed to rental property. Secretary Schindler asked City Attorney Hills if there are any stipulations as to whether or not a home can be rental. Hills stated that the only stipulation is that the home be a single family home. Sandy Schouweiler, 6601-133rd Street W., stated that all of the lots on her side of the street are large and that is one of the reasons she had continued to reside in that neighborhood. Julie Bailey, 6541-133rd Street, stated that the lot has not been clearly defined and that during the staff report the maps were flashed so quickly that she didn't have time to review them. She stated that the discussions have been a lot of maybes and perhaps. She would like to know what kind of expenses will be put on her as a homeowner if her yard is dug un to address the drainage issues. She is also concerned about the consistency of the home blending in with the existing neighborhood. Bailey also stated that she did not like Commissioner Blundetto's attitude toward her husband during an earlier discussion and that Blundetto should show more respect to her husband. Bailey stated that Blundetto is not impacted by the decision to subdivide the property. 4 Commissioner Blundetto stated that he previously lived in this neighborhood for 18 years in a home on Findlay Avenue and that he is very impacted by what happens in this neighborhood as the Commission has made an investment in all communities within Apple Valley. Secretary Schindler explained what the Planning Commission's responsibility is when reviewing a project and the public hearing process. Commissioner Diekmann stated that he appreciates all of the comments from the public but what is he most concerned is about meeting the lot requirements. He feels that the lot split is in keeping with the general ideal of the City and doesn't see anything wrong with the proposal and that the land owner has a right to split the lot. Lovelace discussed the public hearing notification process to nearby homeowners. He informed the public that City staff is also available to answer any questions prior to the meeting. The public can feel free to contact Planning or Engineering with any questions they may have. Secretary Schindler also added that comments can be submitted in writing via a letter or an e-mail to be forwarded to the Commission. Commissioner Helgeson stated that 12 out of 17 of the lots are smaller in size than the proposed lot split. He also understands the neighbor's appreciation of the current environment. In regards to the utilities, Helgeson stated that if the lot is not buildable with the current utilities, the owner will be responsible for moving them. Secretary Schindler closed the public hearing with the standard remarks. It is the policy of the Planning Commission not to act on an item the same night as its public hearing. Meyers stated that staff will continue to work with the applicant to address the issues brought forth tonight. 6. LAND U5E/ACTION ITEMS A. River Valley Wireless Tower -Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit to Allow for the Construction of a 90-foot Communications Associate City Planner Margaret Dykes presented the request from River Valley Church and T-Mobile for a conditional use permit for a wireless communication tower to be located at River Valley Church, 14898 Energy Way. Dykes reported that the proposed tower and antennas are subject to conditions listed in Section 155.385 of the City code that was recently amended on September 28, 2006. The City Code now states that structures must be set back from structures on abutting properties a minimum of 2 times the fall zone of the structure. The applicant is proposing to construct the 90-foot monopole approximately 4 feet from the church building, 56 feet from the northwest property line, 107 feet from the north property line, and 214 feet from the east property line. Dykes stated that although the applicant has not submitted the engineering plans for the tower, the manufacturers states that the monopole will be designed with a weak point about 54 feet up from the base so that if the structure fails, the top 36 feel would fall and collapse on itself. The 36-foot measurement would be considered the tower's fall zone. The City's current ordinance states that the tower must be located at least 72 feet form any structure, and 54 feet from any property line. Dykes reported that the plans show that the tower will be surrounded by a 6-foot high fence topped by barbed wire. Barbed wire fencing is allowed only in areas zoned for Agricultural uses. Dykes stated that all communication towers require the issuance of a building permit, and the City Council must authorize the issuance of the building permit. The applicant has not submitted an application for building permit authorization because they state they must perform soil boring tests. A public hearing for this item was held on September 20, 2006. No comments were received from the public and the Planning Comrnission did not express any concerns about the proposed CUP. In addition, this request is the same one that was presented by the applicant in June 2006. Dykes reported that staff is recommending approval of this item. MOTION: Commissioner Helgeson moved, seconded by Burke, to recommend approval of a Conditional Use Permit fora 90-foot monopole communications tower to be located four feet (4') from the building at 14898 Energy Way, in accordance with the site plan received in City offices on August 30, 2006, subject to all applicable City Codes and standards and the following condition: No tower shall be constructed prior to the issuance by the City of a building permit. The motion carried 5-0. B. "PD-341" Amendment -Consider an Amendment to the Maximum Building Height in Zone 4A of the Planned Development 341 Tabled at the request of the petitioner. C. Wal-Mart CUP Amendments -Consider Amendments to the Existing Temporary Trailer Storage, Outdoor Garden Display and Sales, and Propane Tank Display and Sales Area Condifional Use Permits Tabled at the request of the petitioner. D. Wal-Mart -Consider Amendment to an Existing Conditional Use Permit to Allow for the Relocation of the Cardboard Bale and Pallet Storage Area, and Site PlanBuilding Permit Authorization to Allow for the Construction of 72,786 sq. ft. Addition to an Existing 129, 958 sq. ft. Retail Store Tabled at the request of the petitioner. 7. OTHER BUSINESS None. 8. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Commissioner Burke moved, seconded by Blundetto, to adjourn the meeting at 8:13 p.m.