HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/08/1992PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
CITY OF APPLE VALLEY
January 8, 1992
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 7:33 p.m. by Chairman Alan Felkner.
Members Present: Karen Edgeton, Alan Felkner, Eugene Kitzman, James
Norris, Jeannine Churchill, and Marcia Gowling.
Members Late: Joe Nordlund (After Consent Agenda Approval).
Absent: None.
Staff Present: Richard Kelley, Meg McMonigal, Scott Hickok, Lon Aune,
Dennis Miranowski, and Dennis Welsch.
Others Present: See the Sign -in Sheet.
2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
The agenda was approved (6 -0) with the addition of a Robert Julik rearyard
setback variance request at 13531 Gossamer Way (PC92- 006 -V); verbal report on
establishment of a church within the Apple Valley Business Center and a verbal
report on the mobile home annual permit process.
3. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
The minutes of the December 8, 1991 Planning Commission Meeting were
approved (6 -0) as submitted.
4. CONSENT AGENDA
MOTION: Member Gowling moved, seconded by Member Kitzman, to recommend
approval of a front yard setback variance for a new house to be located at 7405
130th Street West, owned by Mr. Bruce Erickson, (PC92- 004 -V) as per the staff
review and recommendations. The motion carried unanimously 6 - 0.
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
None.
Planning Commission Minutes
January 8, 1992
Page 2
6. LAND USE /ACTION ITEMS
A. Whitney Plaza Mixed Retail Commercial Development -
Comprehensive Plan Change, Planned Development Rezoning,
Replatting, Site Plan Review
LOCATION: Northwest Corner of Cedar Avenue and Whitney Drive
PETITIONER: Daly Development Company (PC91- 058 -PZSB)
STAFF REPORT: Richard Kelley, January 8, 1992
City Planner Richard Kelley reported on the comments made at the December
18, 1991 public hearing and provided the Planning Commission with a list of four
major issues:
1) The Whitney Avenue parcel is now to be considered part of the downtown as
per the City Council's direction.
2) The Whitney parcel should be compatible with adjacent uses.
3) Trip generation from the Whitney Plaza project is a critical issue. Fast
food uses create most of the vehicles even though the proposed fast foods
(Taco Bell and Dairy Queen) state that the staff estimates are up to 50%
too high for this site.
4) There are significant differences in the times of uses by different stores
on the site. For example, office users would primarily be on the site
during the day, while retail and fast food users may be on the site day,
evening, and weekend times.
Kelley also described the need for a subdivision and the need to move the
access at the northeast corner of the site further south. The access to Cedar
Avenue will require Dakota County approval during the platting process. He also
recommended that access onto Whitney Avenue be reduced to one simple access along
the west side of the project. Kelley noted that in the most recent site plan,
parking and landscaping had been redone and meet the City standards with minor
exceptions. He also noted that bay doors, proposed by Jiffy Lube and Midas
Muffler, would face toward Cedar Avenue. In the City's current codes such doors
must be turned away from the street elevation.. In this case, the most practical
method of screening the doors would be with additional canopy plantings. Kelley
also reported that the alterations to the design of the strip center and the two
proposed fast food restaurants was more compatible with the residential nature
of the neighborhood.
The Planning Staff recommended that there is ample vacant land remaining
within the downtown to absorb the proposed commercial uses and that further
justification should be provided for changing the high density multi- family
residential designation of the Comprehensive Plan on the Whitney site. The
Planning Staff recommended that if the site is used for a different purpose than
multiple residential uses, limited business or institutional uses would create
a better transition to the existing multiple residential and institutional users
surrounding the site.
Planning Commission Minutes
January 8, 1992
Page 3
The Staff recommended denial of the Comprehensive Plan change, the proposed
planned development rezoning, the proposed preliminary plat, and the site plan
building permit authorization due to its inconsistency with the current
Comprehensive Plan designations and past policy for transitional uses.
Community Development Director Dennis Welsch provided a background report
dated January 3, 1992 in which he reviewed the project from an economic
development perspective. He noted that changes in the Comprehensive Plan and the
impact on residential units to the west and north have always been a major
concern of all the staff. At the City Council's December 30, 1991 meeting, four
Council Members agreed that 155th Street should be the southern boundary of the
downtown. Welsch noted that the Whitney Plaza should then be considered as part
of the downtown for commercial development purposes. He asked the Commission to
consider the negative impacts of the Whitney Plaza project on the residential
areas to the north and west including: traffic, air pollution, lighting, noise,
and commotion. He noted that the degree of impact is a subjective determination
on the part of the Commission and Staff as well as adjacent property owners who
had a split opinion regarding this project.
He asked the Commission to consider what type and location of commercial
use would have the least impact on the existing residential area. Should it be
limited business, including offices and /or retail businesses? He also asked the
Commission to consider whether the urban design perspective of these buildings
is the type of design that should be located at the entry gate to the downtown.
Welsch pointed out that adding fast food restaurants to this site creates
a traffic burden and a draw of traffic (1400 -1700 trips) to the site from Whitney
Avenue and the west end of the community. He noted that the strip center has far
fewer impacts on the neighborhood than the fast food development and that it has
a similar physical impact as an office building except that the office building
may be more aesthetically pleasing and add more tax base and jobs.
Welsch recommended that the Comprehensive Plan be amended to create a
designation of retail business on the Whitney Plaza site. He also recommended
that a four lot subdivision for one smaller fast food operation and a strip
center or development be approved. He recommended that an extensive planned unit
development with conditions to limit the uses and mitigate the traffic noise,
light, odor and trash collection problems be written prior to final approval of
this project.
A general discussion ensued regarding clarification of the specific issues
that the Planning Commission was voting on. Associate Planner McMonigal
clarified that the Commission should first deal with the Comprehensive Plan
Designation issue and then deal with specific zoning issues on the site. Member
Churchill noted that changing the plan is inevitable along this growing Cedar
Avenue corridor.
Planning Commission Meeting
January 8, 1992
Page 4
MOTION "A ": Member Churchill moved, seconded by Member Nordlund, to
recommend amending the Comprehensive Plan Designation for the Whitney Plaza site
from multiple residential (HD) to a mix of retail and general business (RB /GB),
and add to the text of the Comprehensive Plan limitations to the uses that would
occur on such a site because of the adjacent multi- family and residential areas.
The motion passed 4 - 3.
MOTION "B ": Member Nordlund moved, seconded by Member Churchill, to
recommend to the City Council to direct the Staff to return at a future meeting
with further language limiting uses on the Whitney Plaza site, because of the
adjacent residential development. (This is an attempt to make the uses more
compatible with the residential development.) The motion passed 6 in favor and
1 abstention (Gowling).
Developer Daly asked the Commission to consider appropriate Planned Unit
Development language as per the Staff memo presented by Dennis Welsch.
The Commission discussed the impact that fast food traffic may have on the
residential area. Mr. Daly asked the City Project Engineer Lon Aune to comment
on the capacity of Whitney Drive. Aune responded that the street trip capacity
of Whitney Avenue is 6,000 trips per day.. Daly noted that the townhouse
association members to the north of the project were polled by representatives
of the association and that the association itself does not object to the
project. He noted that the fast food restaurants want to be on this site because
of the exposure and access to this site.
Member Nordlund stated that his experience with fast food restaurants has
been very difficult, particularly after normal business hours and in the later
evening periods. He stated that in his opinion fast food restaurants and
residential development do not mix.
Member Norris noted that fast food establishments at the site would be a
problem because they are adjacent to a school and residents. He stated that he
would only support this project if there was no fast food adjacent to the school
or the residents.
MOTION "C ": Member Churchill moved, seconded by Member Nordlund, to
rescind Motion "B ". The motion carried unanimously.
MOTION "D ": Member Nordlund moved, seconded by Member Churchill, to
recommend to the City Council changes to the text of the Comprehensive Plan Land
Use Section relating to the Whitney Plaza location which states: "When a
property has double frontage, where one frontage is a minor arterial with
commercial uses, and the other is a residential community collector or less (in
capacity), a Planned Unit Development should be utilized to select appropriate
commercial uses and mitigate impacts on adjacent residential uses from traffic,
noise, commotion, lighting, and other non- compatible activities within the
Planning Commission Minutes
January 8, 1992
Page 5
commercial area." The motion carried 5 in favor, 0 opposed, and 2 abstentions
(Gowling and Edgeton).
NOTION "E ": Member Edgeton moved, seconded by Member Churchill, to
recommend to the City Council a Planned Unit Development zoning for the Whitney
Plaza Site, limited to one fast food restaurant and a strip center development
as described in the memo presented by Dennis Welsch dated January 3, 1992. The
motion failed with three members in favor and four members opposed.
MOTION "F': Member Felkner moved, seconded by Member Norris, to recommend
a Planned Unit Development Zoning for the Whitney Plaza Project site with no fast
food restaurant included on the site. The motion failed with three members
voting in favor, three members opposed, and one abstention.
The consensus of the Planning Commission was to send the recommendations
on the Comprehensive Plan and the minutes of deliberation regarding zoning on to
the City Council for a decision. The Commission understood that because of their
deadlock on the zoning issue there would be no formal recommendation submitted
from the Planning Commission regarding amendments to the zoning code or the
Planned Unit Development permit. No further action was taken.
6B. Norwest Bank - Site Plan Review & Building Permit
Authorization on the southwest corner of Cedar Avenue
and 143rd Street West
PETITIONER: Oppidan Investment Company (PC92- 003 -B)
STAFF REPORT: Richard Kelley, January 8, 1992
City Planner Richard Kelley provided a background report in which he
reviewed the site plan, the traffic circulations plans and parking plans, all of
which meet the City requirements. He noted that Williams Brothers Pipeline,
which runs through the site, is a design problem. The applicant will be required
to obtain approval of Williams Pipeline to place parking within the pipeline
easement.
Kelley reviewed the site drainage which will be worked out in much greater
detail with the Engineering Staff at a later date.
The applicant provided the Planning Commission with architectural drawings
illustrating a Prairie School type architecture and wood trim around all window
units. Kelley noted that this is in character with the type of architecture and
is more compatible with adjacent residential area. The project will be required
to provide low elevation site lighting with high pressure sodium lights and a
shoebox light fixture. Pathways and sidewalks will be required along 143rd and
Cedar Avenue. The applicant has requested that the project be assessed for the
construction of the sidewalks and pathways. The City will escrow an amount for
such sidewalk and pathway improvements to be installed at a future date when
other properties are ready for development.
Planning Commission Minutes
January 8, 1992
Page 6
The Planning Staff has recommended approval of the site plan and building
permit authorization, subject to completion of a landscape plan, upgrading the
site lighting, revising the grading plan in cooperation with the City Engineer,
and escrow account for future sidewalk and pathway construction, and
authorization from William's Pipeline for grading and paving within the Pipeline
Easement.
Member Edgeton asked for clarification regarding signage on Cedar Avenue.
Kelley responded that a free - standing sign and a building sign would be permitted
on this project.
Joe Ryan, the applicant representing Oppidan Investment company, stated
that the goal of the development was to meet the requirements of a limited
business use adjacent to a residential area. He noted that the designs have
attempted to be very sensitive to the adjacent residential area and he has no
objection to the Staff conditions recommended in the Staff report.
Margaret Zahala, 14407 Glenda Drive, stated that she had concern about the
access and traffic onto Cedar Avenue and asked the Commission consider a
semaphore at 143rd and Cedar Avenue. Staff responded that the County and the
State Highway Departments control the approvals necessary for installation of a
semaphore. At this time there is no semaphore proposed at the 143rd and Cedar
Avenue intersection within the next five year construction period.
Mary Quinn, 14325 Glenda Drive, representing the Pennock Shores Homeowner's
Association, stated that the Homeowner's Association is generally agreeable with
the project and the hours of operation by the bank. Traffic at a future date may
be of more concern especially as other uses are developed on this site. She
expressed concern regarding speed along Glenda Drive and the ability of the
Police Department to enforce the current speed limits.
Margaret Zahala asked if a semaphore could be installed if Norwest Bank
would pay for it. Staff response was that the intersection does not currently
meet the traffic warrants for a semaphore and the County and State Highway
Departments would not approve installation of a semaphore at this time.
A general discussion ensued regarding other uses that could occur on the
site, including a possibility of a restaurant and what traffic might be generated
from those future uses.
MOTION: Member Gowling moved, seconded by Member Edgeton, to recommend to
the City Council approval of the site plan and building permit authorization with
the five staff conditions. The motion carried 7 - 0.
Planning Commission Minutes
January 8, 1992
Page 7
8. OTHER BUSINESS
A. Gossamer Way rear yard setback variance request by
Robert Julik (PC92- 006 -V)
STAFF REPORT Meg McMonigal, January 8, 1992
Associate Planner McMonigal provided a background report in which she
described a request by Robert Julik for a four -foot variance to the rear lot line
to allow a 26 -foot setback for the corner of a garage, located on Lot 9 of the
Oaks IV. The house is located at 13531 Gossamer Way.
McMonigal noted that this is an unusual lot in that it is at the edge of
Gossamer Way and Gossamer Court. It is a corner lot, in which the rear lot line
where the garage is to be placed would normally be considered a side lot line
with less of a setback requirement.
MOTION: A motion was made by Member Edgeton, seconded by Member Churchill,
to recommend approval of a variance for property located at 13531 Gossamer Way
to allow for construction of a garage within 26 feet of the rear lot line. The
motion carried 7 - 0.
7. DISCUSSION ITEMS
A. Sign Regulations Revisions - Verbal Report by Scott Hickok
Associate Planner Scott Hickok provided background information on the
needed updates to the City's Sign Code. He reviewed the Southport Plaza variance
case and discussed sign revisions available through a new technical journal
provided by the American Planning Association. Such revisions (when incorporated
into our code) would provide that in multi- tenant buildings, the owner of the
building would have to complete a master sign plan which illustrates elevation,
height, maximum sign area, number of signs, and accurate location of the signs
on the building elevations.
In a separate type of sign plan for similar buildings called a common
signage plan, landowners could receive a bonus of additional signage if the signs
were actually consistent in color, size, lettering and height.
Hickok also mentioned that future sign reviews be incorporated into the
building review process so that both reviews occur simultaneously. He noted that
when the revisions to the sign code are completed, they will be sent to the City
Council for consideration and possible adoption.
A general discussion ensued regarding the possible bonus available for
meeting sign size, color and lettering style.
Planning Commission Minutes
January 8, 1992
Page 8
8. DISCUSSION ITEMS (Continued)
B. Verbal Report on Church within Apple Valley Business Center
Dennis Welsch reported that at the City Council Meeting on January 7, 1992,
the Council decided that an "institutional use" (which had previously been
allowed in an office warehouse complex under the Planned Unit Development
approved for the Linvill Apple Valley Business Center) should include limited
term "church use ". A church has requested approval to locate in the office
warehouse portion of the project facing Galaxie Avenue. The lease would be for
no more than two to three years. Mayor Holton was available and explained the
details of the agreement between the City Council and the Church.
C. Mobile Home Annual Operating Permits
Dennis Welsch explained that the mobile home managers and owners will be
notified that it is time to submit annual operating permits for review by the
Staff and City Council. In this process the Staff reviews the consistency of
each park with the current zoning and mobile home park ordinances as well as life
safety codes. The Staff anticipates that a recommendation on each permit will
be submitted to the City Council for consideration at their first meeting in
February.
D. Mayor Holton - Comments on Joint Meeting
Mayor Holton and Councilmember Ginny Sterling invited the Planning
Commission to have a joint meeting with the City Council sometime in late January
or February. The Mayor and the Councilmember explained that the Council does not
want to dictate land use decisions to the Planning Commission and therefore, did
not want to intervene in the discussion of the Whitney Plaza project at too early
of a date. The Council will consider the Planning Commission's recommendation
regarding Whitney Plaza at its next meeting. The Council does want an objective
recommendation from the Planning Commission.
9. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 10:02 p.m.