Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/01/1993CITY OF APPLE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 1, 1993 1. CALL TO ORDER The City of Apple Valley Planning Commission Meeting of September 1, 1993, was called to order at 7:34 p.m. in the City Council Chambers by Chairman Alan Felkner. Members Present: Chairman Alan Felkner, Frank Blundetto, Jeannine Churchill, Marcia Gowling, and Karen Edgeton. Members Absent: Jim Norris and Len Miller. Staff Present: John Gretz, Rick Kelley, and Scott Hickok. Others Present: See the sign -in sheet. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Chairman Felkner asked staff if there were any changes, additions, or deletions to the agenda as submitted. Staff stated that there were no changes. MOTION: Member Gowling moved, seconded by Member Churchill, to approve the agenda as submitted. The Planning Commission approved the agenda unanimously. 3. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 18, 1993 Chairman Felkner asked staff if they had any proposed changes or corrections to the minutes as submitted. Staff responded that they had no proposed changes. MOTION: Member Gowling moved, seconded by Member Edgeton, to approve the minutes of August 18, 1993, as submitted. The Planning Commission voted to approve the minutes as submitted, 3 - 0, Members Blundetto and Churchill abstaining. 4. CONSENT AGENDA - None - Planning Commission Minutes September 1, 1993 Page 2 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Lampert's Storage Yard - Conditional Use Permit Chairman Felkner opened the public hearing. City Planner Kelley presented the item by reviewing the issues listed in the staff report. The proposal is to issue a conditional use permit for an outdoor storage yard for construction materials by Lampert's Lumber. The property is located between 145th and 146th Street, just east of the existing Lampert's facility. As submitted, the proposal entails a fenced storage area with a zero foot setback to the public street right -of -ways and adjacent property lines. The chain link fence is proposed to include a 3 -strand barbed wire top for security purposes. Use of barbed wire requires special permission from the city. The storage area is also proposed to have a crushed concrete surface rather than a paved surface with a concrete curb and gutter around the perimeter as is required by ordinance. At this time, the site has already been graded and surfaced with the crushed concrete material. The fence has also been installed, although the barbed wire top has not been attached. The grading on the site occurred as part of the reclamation activity to restore the site from the previous gravel mining operation that existed on it. Mr. Kelley noted that the tentative redevelopment plans for this vicinity of the city included mixed residential and a variety of office, warehouse, and commercial uses. The performance standards for outdoor storage areas are particularly important in situations like this to insure the compatibility with the storage yard and the future land uses. Mr. Kelley displayed overhead transparencies of photographs of both the Menard's lumber yard and the Vista Telephone storage yard. In both these instances, substantial efforts had been made to screen and landscape the perimeter of the storage area to improve its appearance. Mr. Kelley concluded his presentation and asked if the commissioners had any questions of staff concerning the proposal. Member Edgeton asked staff to clarify the chain of events leading to the current situation. Mr. Kelley attempted to explain the different contacts that occurred between staff and the petitioner regarding the use of the property for an outdoor storage facility; he referred to some of the correspondence included with the staff report. Chairman Felkner asked staff to provide them with a more detailed time line at the next meeting. Planning Commission Minutes September 1, 1993 Page 3 Chairman Felkner also asked what the distance between the existing fence and the curb line was. Mr. Kelley explained that there is an eight foot boulevard from the curb line to the fence. Member Gowling stated that she understood the need for screening requirements, but asked why the City Forester had suggested a specific size of plantings; the $20,000 estimated cost seemed to be rather expensive. Mr. Kelley responded that the Forester had suggested the size of the plantings in order to assure a relatively quick screening of the area. If smaller plantings were installed, it would be several years before they matured and grew large enough to provide a significant visual screen. Member Edgeton referred to the photograph showing the existing fence along 146th Street. She asked what type of city streetscape improvements were required in this area. Mr. Kelley responded that tree plantings consistent with the streetscape management plan were all that were required here. As an industrial street, no sidewalks are required and there would not be a paved boulevard such as exists within the downtown ring route. Member Gowling asked about the use of fences as a boundary line if concurrence with adjacent property owners is reached. Mr. Kelley explained that the ordinance provides for this; however, under a conditional use permit procedure for outdoor storage, the city has the discretion to require an additional setback. He went on to state that a common boundary fence would be appropriate along the west and north lot lines where the land uses have been established and are also being used for storage. He stated that along the east boundary, a five foot setback with columnar poplar trees has been suggested since it is unknown at this time what specific land use might be established upon that currently vacant property. Chairman Felkner then asked if the petitioner had any presentation or comments that he wished to make to the Commission. Dave Swanson, the yard manager for Lampert's, stated that the fence was installed at the wrong location. He said that the person at their organization who is responsible to coordinate the installation of the fence was on vacation the week that the installer arrived. They are more than willing to have the fence relocated in accordance with the city code. He stated, however, that they continue to need the barbed wire topping in order to satisfy the requirements of their insurer for security purposes. He further stated that they had contacted the city regarding the need for fence permits, and were informed that if the fence were six feet in height or less, a specific building permit was not required. He said that the relationship between the conditional use permit standards for storage areas and fence setback requirements was not made clear to them. Planning Commission Minutes September 1, 1993 Page 4 Member Churchill asked what specific materials will be placed in the outdoor storage area. Mr. Swanson responded that the outdoor storage area was for the purpose of placing construction materials; there might be an occasional semi - trailer parked there overnight after unloading materials. He was informed that the tractor could only be parked on a paved surface. Chairman Felkner asked about fire hydrant requirements referred to in the staff report. Mr. Swanson responded that they did not have an issue with that requirement. Mr. Swanson further stated that their largest concern is over the requirement for paving the site. It was their estimate that the cost of paving the almost 4 acre site would run between $130,000 to $150,000. This does not include the cost of a concrete curb, nor the additional grading expense that would be incurred to prepare the site for paving. He felt that this expense would be a significant hardship on Lampert's. He further stated that this yard was not oriented to the walk -in customer; materials stored here would mostly duplicate what was available in the front yard that currently exists. He went on to state that if a variance to the paving requirement was not approved, Lampert's might choose not to use the property for storage. Member Edgeton asked what type of surface crushed concrete was. Mr. Swanson responded that he was not completely familiar with the physical make -up of the material, but that basically the product originates from recycled and crushed concrete from road reconstruction projects. He stated that Mr. Fischer had told him that this material was equivalent to a traditional paved surface after it becomes packed from vehicle movements and the portland cement reactivates from the rain. Chairman Felkner asked John Gretz if this was the case. Mr. Gretz responded that it was true that the material provided a hard surface, but expressed some reservation over the potential of leeching. Member Blundetto referred to the photograph of the existing situation. He noted the materials that appear to be eroding down the slope through the fence and discoloring the street. Mr. Swanson stated that when the fence is moved back, and the setback area landscaped, this problem should be corrected. Mr. Gene Pederson, representing Fischer Development Company Il, stated that the surrounding future land uses would indeed be mixed residential, office, warehouse, and mixed commercial. He stated that the leeching issue could be easily corrected by sodding the setback area. He stated that on behalf of Fischer Development, a 20 foot setback with landscaped area should be sufficient to adequately screen and buffer the storage area from the future land uses. Planning Commission Minutes September 1, 1993 Page 5 Mr. Brian Olson, representing Vinge Tile, a property owner near the proposed storage area, stated that they were shocked over the appearance of the existing storage site. He stated that in the development of their property they had been required to pave and curb the traffic circulation area, as well as to add decorative block on the rear of their building in order to improve the visual appearance of the facility. He felt that in order to insure fair treatment of all property owners, Lampert's should be held to the current performance standards of the ordinance pertaining to outdoor storage areas. He stated that the improvements required for their property, a much smaller parcel, amounted to about $20,000 in additional costs. He felt that on a proportional basis, the estimated amount quoted by Lampert's was not unreasonable for them to expend. Mr. Olson then distributed photographs of the existing Lampert's facility which were taken from the rearyard area of the Vinge Tile building, Mr. Olson went on to state that if the city approves a barbed wire top for the chain link fence, it should also require additional landscaping to help hide the barbed wire. Doug Vinge, who was in the audience, stated that he is not trying to stop Lampert's from using the property for an open storage yard. Rather, he said he simply wants them to adhere to the same standards that he and everyone else are required to meet. A general discussion ensued among the commissioners regarding performance standards that had been met at similar facilities throughout the community. Chairman Felkner then asked if anyone else from the audience wished to address this topic. There being no further response from the audience, Chairman Felkner then closed the public hearing. He noted that it is the Commission's policy not to act on issues the same night as the public hearing, but rather to weigh all issues raised and hopefully to make a recommendation at the following meeting. 6. LAND USE /ACTION ITEMS - None - 7. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Community Development Department Reorganization John Gretz, the newly appointed Community Development Director, addressed the Commission concerning the recent City reorganization of the Public Works and Community Development Department. He displayed a series of overhead transparencies illustrating the former and revised organizational structures and the number of personnel assigned to each Planning Commission Minutes September 1, 1993 Page 6 operational function. Mr. Gretz explained that the recent resignations of a variety of mid - management level staff presented an opportunity to reorganize and streamline several departments within the City s organization. The revised organizational chart illustrates a flattening of the management structure so that a greater percentage of City employees are represented on the front lines, actually dealing with and providing service to the public. No staff layoffs were necessary as part of this reorganization. The Community Development Department now consists of the planning function, as well as building inspection, engineering, and forestry services. Economic Development functions have been removed from the department and will be provided in the future by either new consultant services, or a new employee dedicated to economic development. The City Council has yet to make the determination exactly how this will be handled. Member Blundetto asked whether or not this reorganization is proposed or already adopted. Mr. Gretz responded that the organizational structure was adopted by the City Council at its last regular meeting. The only outstanding issues remain the manner in which economic development services will be provided and whether or not the City will adopt an ordinance extending the Mayor's term from two to four years. Mr. Gretz noted that with the reduction in the total number of planners from four to two working in the department, the focus of planning will be shifting more to day -to -day project planning. Long -range planning and policy analysis would be done only on an as- needed basis, most likely by an outside consultant. B. Variances in Retrospect Associate Planner Scott Hickok made a brief presentation concerning residential variances. He noted that after variances have been recommended for approval by the Commission, they generally do not see them again. He felt that it would be useful for them to see the results of specific variance approvals. Mr. Hickok then displayed a series of overhead transparencies containing photographs of recently completed residential additions for which variances had been approved. He noted that in each of these cases the addition fit well with the existing house and adjoining properties without any adverse impacts. Mr. Hickok went on to say that the photographs are evidence that the Commission has been using appropriate criteria for approval of variances. He stated that staff will attempt to bring back similar information in the future and provide continuing feedback to the Commission. 8. OTHER BUSINESS - None - Planning Commission Minutes September 1, 1993 Page 7 9. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Member Gowling moved, seconded by Member Blundetto, to adjourn the meeting. Vote 5 - 0. The meeting was adjourned at 8:55 p.m.