HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/15/1992PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
CITY OF APPLE VALLEY
July 15, 1992
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Protem Karen Edgeton called the July 15, 1992 meeting of the City of Apple
Valley Planning Commission to order at 7:33 p.m.
Members Present: Frank Blundetto, Jeannine Churchill, Karen
Edgeton, Marcia Gowling, Jim Norris, and
Eugene Kitzman.
Members Absent: Alan Felkner
Staff Present: Meg McMonigal, Rick Kelley, and Dennis Welsch.
Others Present: See the sign -in sheet.
2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
The agenda was approved as submitted.
3. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE JULY 1, 1992 MEETING
MOTION: Member Gowling moved, seconded by Member Blundetto, to approve the
minutes of the July 1, 1992 Planning Commission Meeting. The motion carried 4 - 0 with two
abstentions.
4. CONSENT AGENDA
None.
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Subdivision of Land -Doyle Airport
LOCATION: Johnny Cake Ridge Road and County Road #38
PETITIONER: Charles P. Doyle /IDS #196 (PC92- 058 -S)
STAFF REPORT: Richard Kelley, dated July 15, 1992
Planning Commission Minutes
July 15, 1992
Page 2
Chairperson Edgeton opened the public hearing and asked City Planner Kelley to
provide a background report regarding the proposed requestsubdivide land at the Doyle
airport site. Kelley said that the subdivision would create four parcels out of two existing
parcels of properties located on the east side of Johnny Cake Ridge Road at County Road #38.
The largest parcel would be used by Independent School District #196 for a future school. The
east side of the site would be made available for development of detached single family homes
adjacent to Mr. Doyle's current home. The property line north of County Road #38 would be
purchased in whole by Shepherd of The Valley Lutheran Church to provide expansion space
for the church;wxd with the remainder to be sold for other residential uses. Kelley stated the
comprehensive plan for the site illustrates the land should be used for a mix of low density
housing and single family homes. The current zoning on the site is agricultural.
Member Gowling asked if the church and school's uses are compatible with the single
family and townhome uses and with the designations on the comprehensive plan. Kelley
responded affirmatively.
Mark Boland, 12779 Diamond Court, asked for clarification regarding the wetland on
the north side of County Road #38. City Planner Kelley explained that the state designates
wetlands and there is a new set of state regulations which will apply to this site requiring
replacement of any wetland lost in the development process.
Members of the school development team, Joel Sutter, Joel Cooper, and Chuck Doyle,
were introduced.
Linda Wilson, 12737 Eveleth Path, expressed concern about water drainage from
County Road #38 and from the church property. She stated the water drainage is a problem
for the entire neighborhood because there is no low area for the waterq rain to. She also stated
she was concerned about the tripling of traffic along County Road #38 and noted that Eveleth
Pais utilized by children as a play area.
City Planner Kelley explained the storm sewer information would be available at the
next Planning Commission meeting.
Linda Wilson asked for clarification regarding where trucks would turn around on the
end of Eveleth Path. Kelley responded that eventually there will be a cul -de -sac on the end of
this street. As an alternative to a cul-de-sac, Eveleth Path may be extended through to County
Road #38 or to Johnny Cake Ridge Road.
The Planning Commission asked the Staff to provide traffic counts on surrounding
streets at the next meeting.
John Tauer, 12768 Diamond Court, asked for further information regarding the
development of parcel "C" and the wetlands on parcel "C ". Joel Sutter stated that the parcel "C"
is a low area between two raised hill areas and that further details regarding how this will be
develope"ill be available when a preliminary plat is filed with the City. Planner Kelley
responded that public hearings will be held when a preliminary plat is actually filed with the
City.
Planning Commission Minutes
July 15, 1992
Page 3
Chuck Doyle, owner of the property, provided background history on the drainage
patterns on the site.
Ted Seglen, 12921 Exley Avenue, asked for clarification regarding the termination of
Exley into a cul -de -sac and when reconstruction would be done. Joel Sutter responded there
appears to be no need for an access to the school from Exley, nor would there be any parking
created at the end of Exley. No bond issue for the school could occur until at least 1994
development to occur one to two years after that date.
Rudy Deck, 12998 Everest Avenue, asked for clarification regarding the size of parcel
"C" and "D" and the number of housing units that could be constructed on parcel "C ". The Staff
responded that parcel "C" could legitimately have between six and seven housing units.
Brad Downs, 12713 Eveleth Path, expressed concern over the zoning and asked for
further clarification regarding what would happen if the bond referendum for the school does
not pass. Joel Sutter stated that if the bond referendum does not pass, the school board would
more than likely try again to pass a bond at a later date. In the long term, the school district
may find that if no action is possible, it would be necessary to resell the property for
residential purposes.
Member Biundetto asked for clarification regarding the layout of the cul -de -sac design.
He asked if the City was committed to the location of future cul -de -sacs in the area. Joel
Cooper responded that the location of the cul -de -sac could be moved. It appears there will be
seven to eight lots in parcel "C ".
Tim Reynolds, 12700'Eveleth Pass, asked for clarification regarding the type of school
which might occur on the site. Joel Sutter stated that a Middle School is possible, but other
options are available such as an 8th or 9th grade center or a small specialized high school type
program.
Member Norris asked for clarification regarding the access to the site from Johnny
Cake. City Planner Kelley responded that there is adequate access frontage along both Johnny
Cake Ridge Road and County Road #38.
A general discussion ensued regarding the impact of the existing zoning on the site if
a school does not get constructed. Kelley explained that the existing comprehensive plan for
the area is single family and townhouse uses. Joel Sutter explained that schools in residential
areas generally are placed near collector streets for bus purposes. He noted that the children
who live north of County Road #38 would more than likely be bused to the school.
Chairperson Edgeton closed the public hearing.
B. Conditional Use Permit for Outdoor Display and Sales
(Union 76)
LOCATION: 147th Street West
PETITIONER: Paul Graffunder (PC92- 051 -C)
STAFF REPORT: Dennis Welsch, dated July 10, 1992
Planning Commission Minutes
July 15, 1992
Page 4
Chairperson Edgeton opened the public hearing and requested the Staff to present a
background report.
Dennis Welsch provided a background report regarding Graffunder's request for a
conditional use permit. Mr. Graf funder had reviewed the conditions stated in the request and
approved. Mr. Graf funder was unable to attend the meeting. The Staff recommended approval
with conditions attached as per the proposed display and storage ordinance dated June 8, 1992.
There was no public comment.
Chairperson Edgeton closed the public hearing.
Member Churchill moved, seconded by Member Norris, to recommend approval of the
conditional use permit as per the staff recommendations. The motion carried 6 - 0.
C. Conditional Use Permit for Outdoor Storage
- Wirsbo Company
LOCA'T'ION: 5925 148th Street West
PETITIONER: Ed Schultz (PC92- 043 -C)
STAFF REPORT: Dennis Welsch, dated July 9, 1992
Chairperson Edgeton opened the public hearing and requested the Staff to present a
background report.
Dennis Welsch provided a background report in which he described the request for a
conditional use permit to provide outdoor storage behind the existing Wirsbo building. He
noted that Wirsbo proposes to use the storage on a temporary basis for materials shipped to the
United States and then shipped out at a later date with materials produced in the Wirsbo
operation. This site is within the footprint of the future additions to the Wirsbo building and
would be accessible only from a new door cutwthn the sidewall of the existing building.
Wirsbo states that this is a temporary solution
A would be phased out in 1993 or 1994.
The Planning Staff recommended approval of the conditional use permit for the 5,000
square foot pad for outdoor storage of finished pipe products for a period not exceed three
years or construction of phase II and II of the building, whichever occurs first. The Staff also
recommended that fencing surrounding the stored pipe materials be improved with a visual
screening device such as slating that access and loading be limited to the side door of the
existing building.
Ed Schultz, General Manager of Wirsbo Company, 5925 West 148th Street, reviewed the
proposal and timing with the Planning Commission. He asked the Planning Commission to
consider an alternate screening material such as heavy canvas or plastic sheeting materials
which could be installed over the existing fence. The Planning Commission asked Mr. Schultz
to work with the City Staff to resolve this issue before the next City Council meeting.
Kathy James, representing VenStar Corporation, spoke in opposition to any outdoor
storage in the business parkpyliecause it is difficult to manage a business park with materials
stored haphazardly throughout the area. She stated that provided the storage is on a temporary
Planning Commission Minutes
July 15, 1992
Page 5
basis and is screened, this may be a more acceptable solution, but still objected to the concept
of outdoor storage.
There was no other public comment.
Chairperson Edgeton closed the public hearing.
MOTION: Member Norris moved, seconded by Member Churchill, to recommend
approval of the conditional use permit for temporary outdoor storage as per the Staff
recommendations provided Mr. Schultz work with the City Staff to review alternate materials
for the screening device to be attached to the fence. The motion carried 6 - 0.
6. LAND USE /ACTION ITEMS
A. Variance for Rearyard Setback - Porch Addition
LOCATION: 13425 Gull Court
PETITIONER: Perry J. and Elizabeth A. Knapp (PC92- 059 -V)
STAFF REPORT: Meg McMonigal, dated July IS, 1992
Associate Planner Meg McMonigal described the request by Perry and Elizabeth Knapp
to construct a 4- season porch on the rear of their house to be set within twenty feet of the rear
property line. The code requires a 30 foot setback from the property line, therefore a 7 -foot
variance is requested.
Mr. and Mrs. Knapp explained the variance request in detail. They noted that the house
is set into a hill with a steep driveway, but there was no other place to place the house on the
lot in order to reduce the steepness of the driveway. Associate Planner McMonigal explained
the two walls and wooded area behind the house and the lack of impact on adjacent structures.
The Planning Staff recommended that the variance be denied, because based on the
requirements of the state statute and the city code a demonstrated physical hardship was not
present and logical alternatives are available.
MOTION: Member Norris moved, seconded by Member Blundetto, to recommend
approval noted that the hardship is the topography on the lot and that there is no physical or
visual impact on adjacent lots. The motion carried 6 - 0.
B.
Variance to Allow a Pylon Sign - Norwest Bank
LOCATION:
14325 Cedar Avenue
PETITIONER:
KIJ Improvement (PC92- 060 -V)
STAFF REPORT:
Richard Kelley, dated July 15, 1992
City Planner Richard Kelley provided a background report in which he described a sign
variance request by Norwest Bank to construct a 24 foot high pylon sign in a limited business
zone, rather than adhere to the code requirements of an 8 foot high ground sign.
The Staff recommended denial of the pylon sign variance because it is located in a
limited business district in which the variance criteria cannot be met.
Planning Commission Minutes
July 15, 1992
Page 6
Kelley noted that one ground sign and two building signs are allowed in the limited
business district and explained the sign code variance criteria. He suggested that a ground sign
similar to the one at the Biewald Hackett and Minnehaha Nursery might be applicable on this
site.
Chairperson Edgeton asked the Staff to prepare a report on signage at the time that each
building is reviewed.
Mr. Joe Ryan, representing the developer and owner of the property, and Shelly Borland,
representing Norwest Banksstated that a ground sign was shown on the original site plan but
it was a mistake. Mr. Ryan noted that all other banks in the area have pylon signs and that the
site is shielded from the residential area to the west by an 18 foot high hill. He stated that this
was a competitive issue for the bank since the pylon is a key to the bank's identity.
City Planner Kelley described different sites along Cedar Avenue and 140th Street
which will have to meet similar criteria. He noted that only the M.W. Johnson Realty sign is
currently more than 8 feet in height and does not meet the code.
Member Churchill asked whether Ryan and the City could look at alternative
landscaping with a hill and an eight (8) foot sign at the top to meet the existing code while still
providing more visibility. Mr. Ryan responded that it would be best to decide the issue and
send it on to the City Council for a decision on July 23.
Member Gowling stated that the bank parcel is very visible and should adhere to the
ordinance, no pylon should be allowed at this site.
Mr. Ryan said the site is 100 feet from the retail business zone.
MOTIONS Member Norris moved, seconded by Member Blundetto, to recommend denial
of the variance since it does not meet the criteria for a variance and is located in a limited
business district. Further, the Commission recommended that the applicant work with the Staff
on other alternative landscaping and sign configurations to solve the issue without the need for
a variance. The motion carried 5 - 0 with one abstention.
7. DISCUSSION ITEMS
A. Amoco Certicare Sketch Plan
LOCATION: SW Corner of 147th and Glenda Drive
(Old Amoco Site)
PETITIONER: Amoco /The Linn Companies (PC92 -01 -B)
STAFF REPORT: Meg McMonigal, dated July 15, 1992
Associate Planner Meg McMonigal provided a background report in which she described
the request by Amoco Certicare to construct an8 to 10 bay auto repair operation located on the
west side of Granada Avenue at 147th Street. The project would be a redevelopment project
in that the Amoco gas station currently exists on the site and would be torn down for this
operation. She described the ownership situation in which the Linn Companies would own and
Planning Commission Minutes
July 15, 1992
Page 7
operate the Certicare operation and would also manage the Amoco gas station on the east side
of Granada Avenue.
Brian Wass, the architect, and Steve Linn, the potential owner, provided details of the
proposal. A general discussion ensued. The consensus of the Planning Commission was that
this was a fitting use on this site.
MOTION: A motion was made by Member Gowling, seconded by Member Blundetto, to
request the Planning Staff to prepare a public hearing notice to amend the current zoning text
to allow for auto repair operations within the retail business district provided they receive a
conditional use permit and to establish those conditions in the proposed ordinance. The motion
carried 6 - 0. The Commission also directed the Staff to prepare for a hearing on August 5
regarding this zoning text amendment.
The Commission also requested the Staff to provide the results of PCA tests and cleanup
activities on the Amoco site which will occur within 90 days.
6C. Zoning Text Amendments for an Accessory or Conditional
Use Permits for Outdoor Storage and Display
LOCATION: City of Apple Valley
PETITIONER: City of Apple Valley (PC92- 042 -0)
STAFF REPORT: Dennis Welsch, dated July 15, 1992
After the July 1, 1992 Planning Commission Meeting the Commission requested the Staff
to provide a comparison with other cities regarding outdoor display and storage zoning code
requirements. Dennis Welsch provided a display in which 14 other communities were reviewed
and summarized the comparison by stating that 11 of 14 do allow for outdoor display, but only
one of the cities requires movable bases so that materials can be brought inside the building
and secured when the business is not open. Many of the cities which do allow for outdoor
storage or display do require a permit.
A general discussion ensued regarding the applicability of these standards to the City
of Apple Valley.
MOTION: Member Blundetto moved, seconded by Member Gowling, to recommend
approval of the outdoor display text amendment as previously circulated. The motion carried
5 -1.
B. Land Use Plan Concept
Associate Planner Meg McMonigal provided a series of maps in which she illustrated the
developable land left within the community and the potential number of housing units and
square footage of commercial /industrial buildings which could be added to the community
when all remaining land has been developed. The Planning Commission discussed the issues
and placed the undeveloped land map on file.
Planning Commission Minutes
July 15, 1992
Page 8
8. OTHER BUSINESS - Business Schedules for Coming Months
Member Churchill stated that she will not be able to attend meetings on August 19,
September 2, and September 16 because of her work schedule. Member Edgeton stated she will
be out of town on September 16.
9. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 10:42 p.m.