Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/01/1989CITY OF APPLE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FEBRUARY 1. 1989 1. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chairman Robert Erickson at 7:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of the City of Apple Valley City Hall. Members Present: Chairman Erickson, Members Richard Carlson, Alan Felkner, Frank Kleckner and Marcia Gowling. Members Absent: Virginia Sterling. Staff Present: Richard Kelley, Scott Hickok, Keith Gordon, Meg McMonigal, Jim Plummer, Dennis Miranowski and Lon Aune. Others Present: See sign in sheet. 2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA: The agenda was approved as written. 3. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF JANUARY 18, 1989. The minutes were approved as submitted. 4. CONSENT AGENDA (Non - controversial land use action items needing no discussion may be placed on this agenda by Commission members. One motion sends these items on to the City Council with a recommendation of approval as per the Staff recommendations.) A. Rezoning from "A" to "P ". LOCATION: East Side of Johnny Cake Ridge Road on the 124th Street Alignment. PETITIONER: City of Apple Valley, Dakota County, Minnesota. B. Rezoning from "A" to "P ". LOCATION: Between Pilot Knob Road and Johnny Cake Ridge Road, North of the 124th Street Alignment. PETITIONER: City of Apple Valley, Dakota County, Minnesota. Planning Commission Minutes February 1, 1989 Page 2 C. Official Mapping Resolution for Rolling Ridge Plat Phase 2. LOCATION: 143rd Street Alignment at Diamond Path. PETITIONER: City of Apple Valley, Dakota County, Minnesota. MOTION: A motion was made by Commissioner Carlson and seconded by Felkner to approve the consent agenda. The motion passed 5 - 0. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Rezoning from "R -IA" to "R -1C" and Preliminary Plat of Gangl's Estate. LOCATION: 12971 Galaxie Avenue. PETITIONER: Bernard Gangl. City Planner Rick Kelley presented the Staff report dated 2 -1 -89 and noted that in the packet the item was listed as 5B, although it was 5A on the agenda. Rick Kelley explained the proposal for rezoning and preliminary plat for four (4) single- family lots. This is a simple project which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The existing driveway access to Galaxie Avenue is to be terminated as part of the plat approval. An escrow account for a future pathway along Galaxie Avenue will be required as a part of the development agreement. No one from the public was present to speak at the hearing. The item will reappear on the Planning Commission agenda on February 15, 1989. B. Rezoning from "R -1A" to "R -1C" and Preliminary Plat of Acorn Hill. LOCATION: 12927 Galaxie Avenue. PETITIONER: Norman Wachter. Associate Planner Scott Hickok presented the report dated February 1, 1989 for the rezoning and preliminary plat for four (4) single - family lots. The existing driveways onto Galaxie Avenue would be eliminated and all of the driveways would be directed into the proposed cul -de -sac from Galaxie Avenue. No one from the public was present at the hearing to speak. The item will reappear on the February 15th Planning Commission agenda. Planning Commission Minutes February 1, 1989 Page 3 C. Conditional Use Permit for Permanent Outdoor Parking and Storage. LOCATION: Southwest Corner of Garden View Drive and Walnut Lane. PETITIONER: Richard Tuthill. City Planner Rick Kelley presented the report dated February 1, 1989 for the Conditional Use Permit request. After Staff review, it was suggested that there is a fence only the west side with low plantings around the street sides. This would enable the City to keep an eye on the parking lot and make sure that it was kept up with the conditions for the permit. Mr. Richard Tuthill, the petitioner, spoke indicating that he would like to use the lot for additional parking for his service station. He is purchasing the gas station property from Mobil and wants to make it a more modern facility; it was built in 1965. The area is congested and the parking on the adjacent lot would alleviate some of the congestion. Commission Felkner asked if there would be a driveway going out to Garden View Drive. Mr. Tuthill responded that he is not planning to use the Garden View curb cut as a driveway. Chair Erickson asked if the fence would function as a screen or for security purposes. Mr. Tuthill replied that he will cooperate with what the City wants regarding a fence. The operation hours for the station are 6:00 a.m. until midnight. Commissioner Felkner asked if the parking lot would be lit and was told that it would not. Marcia Gowling asked about Central Telephone. They have not used their Conditional Use Permit to make use of the lot. Roger Pennington commented that a big fence would like a big, black box" and would detract from the neighborhood. He also commented that he thinks this is using a temporary space to revitalize the commercial area. Thirdly, he stated he did not mind Central Telephone using the lot because they did not use it on weekends and evenings. This type of lot, however, would be an "attractive nuisance" attracting trouble. Ms. Melissa Miller, 221 County Road 43, owns the property adjacent to Dick's Mobil. She asks if lights will be put up in the future and commented that she doesn't think the landscaping will be maintained in the long run. She indicated that the fence that is present on the site now isn't kept up. She fully agrees that more parking is needed, but is worried about the maintenance of the property. Julie Olson, 244 Walnut Lane, expressed concern over what the Conditional Use Permit would do to property values. She stated that she is definitely against this proposal. Teddy Lafferty Statz, 116 Garden View Drive, commented that it will drop the value of the house, she does not want more traffic, and that it will cause more noise. She stated that she is definitely against this proposal. Planning Commission Minutes February 1, 1989 Page 4 Brenda Birkeland, 120 Garden View Drive, indicated that she is totally against the lot being used for parking, is worried by tow trucks and wrecked cars being parked in the lot and spare parts and tires being stored in the lot. Dick Lee, Sr., 344 Walnut Lane, spoke indicating he is totally against it. He said the station is dumpy already and the commercial area should not be brought another block into the residential area. Richard Lee, Jr., 241 Walnut Lane, spoke that he is against the Conditional Use Permit and indicated that the station is not kept up now. Steve Lane, 260 Walnut Lane, commented that the fence behind Dick's is not repaired when it has holes in it. He indicated that cars now are parked on Garden View and often cars are at the station for a long period of time. He is worried how long cars would sit in the lot about the contamination of oil and anti- freeze that may end up in the soil. He wants to make sure that cars do not use Walnut Lane. He is worried diesels will run all night, and feels Dick has more business than he can handle. They now work out in the lot. Is there any way to guarantee that they won't be working out in the new parking lot? He is worried about a lot of traffic on Walnut Lane. Melissa Miller, 221 County Road 43, spoke again asking what the zoning is again at Dick's Mobil and indicated that she is worried about allowing the adjacent lot to be used for parking because she feels Dick's is not kept up now and that will be the continued trend with additional land being used for his operations. Bryan Norm, 220 Walnut Lane, indicated that he is totally against this proposal. He said there is now a lot of trash and debris around the station that blows into his yard. The fence is constantly knocked down. He is worried about dumping going on and abandoned cars. He thinks it is a spot for little kids to play and get hurt. Tom Collen, 124 Garden View Drive, indicated he is worried about further encroachment of commercial into a residential neighborhood. He thinks a high fence would be difficult to police, but no fence would be dangerous to children. He also thinks it will drop property values. This lot provides a buffer and should stay a buffer and he feels a two - family unit should be put up on this lot. He wanted to know what will be stored on the lot and indicated that it will be difficult to cancel the permit after Dick has invested in the lot. Sue Knight, 117 Garden View Drive, spoke indicating she is worried about the question of the fence, security and kids hanging out and creating additional noise around the lot. She is also worried that because Centel will not have use of this lot that they will have to park along Walnut Lane. Planning Commission Minutes February 1, 1989 Page 5 Chair Erickson indicated that Centel is going to be submitting a parking plan to the City this spring. Commissioner Carlson indicated that he feels this is encroachment of commercial into residential neighborhood. Gabe Collen, 124 Garden View Drive, spoke indicating that people are concerned that approval is a foregone conclusion because Dick is the City's Fire Chief. She was also asking about the surveyors that she had seen out on the property. Chair Erickson commented that the Dick Tuthill is the Fire Chief has little to do with the request and if anything, the City will have to scrutinize this request more carefully than another. Irene Shackman, 228 Walnut Lane, indicated that surveyors came to her door and asked if they could use her property. She said they could as long as they could put it back in the same condition. They said they could not. She said she likes to see a business person make progress, however, is worried that property values will go down. She indicated she is opposed to the Conditional Use Permit. Steve Lane, 260 Walnut Lane, asked about the time period and the enforcement of the Conditional Use Permit. Roger Pennington, 229 Walnut Lane, asked if this is permitted and is one step closer to commercial zoning on the lot. Mike McDonald, 240 Walnut Lane, indicated he is opposed to the Conditional Use Permit. He thinks it is an encroachment into the residential area. He is worried about increased traffic and noise, decreased property values and safety because there are lots of kids in the neighbor. Glen Birkeland, 120 Garden View Drive, indicated that the lot is a mess sitting empty. Melissa Miller, 221 County Road 43, asked if the Conditional Use Permit conditions aren't met what happens if he vacates the property? She also asked how many violations are allowed before the permit is revoked? Ed Reynolds, 224 Walnut Lane, indicated his concerns for encroachment of commercial into the residential area and property values. He does not want the parking lot. Steve Lane, 260 Walnut Lane, asked how many cars would be able to be parked on the lot and was told that it would be 16 to 18. Chair Erickson closed the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes February 1, 1989 Page 6 D. Rezoning from "Planned Development" to "RB" and "GB ". LOCATION: Between Cedar and Fordham Avenues, Along the 153rd Street Alignment. PETITIONER: Southport Properties. City Planner Rick Kelley presented the reported dated February 1, 1989 for the rezoning. There is no development proposal at this time for this property. One problem with this request is that the two (2) zoning districts requested do not follow property lines and are not in separate ownership. This causes the City problems when a use is proposed on the property. As a part of this rezoning, the City would need easements for the streets that are to be constructed in the area. Chair Erickson expressed his concern over the lack of a buffer between the residential and the commercial. Mr. Winkler, the petitioner, indicated that 153rd and Galaxie will be heavily traveled retail roads. Rick Kelley explained that the City has been working with Ryan Construction on the corner property. They expect a shopping center with a major tenant of approximately 150,000 square feet. There are no specific plans yet, but Mr. Kelley expects them with six (6) weeks. Commissioner Carlson asked why this proposal isn't being considered all at once, why a rezoning now if there is a proposal coming soon? Chair Erickson asked if limited business could function as a buffer. Commissioner Carlson asked about whether there would be a park in this area. City Planner Kelley indicated that the location of the pond /park, the location of the shopping center and the location of the single - family all derive on the uses on the balance of the property. Chair Erickson indicated that he is not comfortable with retail business and is worried about the transition. Commission Felkner asked if a storm holding pond is required and was told that it is. Chair Erickson closed the public hearing. Text Amendments to Zoning Regulations Regarding Housing and Commercial Performance Standards. LOCATION: City -wide. PETITIONER: City of Apple Valley, Dakota County, Minnesota. City Planner Rick Kelley presented the report dated February 1, 1989 on the proposed interim performance standards for multi - family, multi - residential and commercial buildings in the City. Chair Erickson inquired whether there was any additional citizen input on these standards. City Planner Kelley indicated that he had spoken to Gary Shade, who seemed to be relatively happy with the standards. City Planner Rick Kelley indicated that the purpose of these interim standards are to thoroughly evaluate and redefine the multi - family zoning categories to narrow the uses allowed in the various districts and to specify standards which relate to the surrounding uses. Planner Kelley went through the memo in detail with the Planning Commission. Chair Erickson closed the public hearing. No comments were received by the public. Planning Commission Minutes February 1, 1989 Page 7 6. LAND USE /ACTION ITEMS: A. Building Permit Authorization for VenStar 15. LOCATION: Northwest Corner of 149th Street W. & Everest Avenue. PETITIONER: VenStar Corporation & William McKeag, AIA. Associate Planner Scott Hickok presented the Staff report dated February 1, 1989. The petitioner, Mr. Bruce Maus, presented the building material to the Planning Commission. He indicated it is an upgrade of the VenStar 9 building, which currently exists in the same subdivision, the North Star Industrial Park. The material is called "St. Cloud crushed granite" and it will be on all sides of the building. It is very similar to the materials used in the VenStar 10 office building located on 147th Street. Mr. Maus indicated that the rear of the building will be different than the front. It will be a plain, painted, ribbed design; rather than the exposed aggregate. He has signed a tenant and would like to start construction in early February. Parking is nearly double what is required for this building. Mr. Maus indicated the reason there is excess parking is because in the long term the use may change where more parking is needed. Mr. Maus indicated that the proposal exceeds the landscape requirements. As an aside for the previous public hearing, he indicated he does not believe that a registered landscape architect is necessary to do landscaping for a building site. There should be differentiation depending on the size of the project. Small projects, for instance, don't need a registered landscape architect. MOTION: Commissioner Carlson moved to recommend approval of the building permit for VenStar 15. Frank Kleckner seconded it. The motion passed 5 - 0. 7. DISCUSSION ITEMS: Chair Erickson indicated that he received the information on traffic on Pennock Avenue that he requested at the last meeting. He was interested in knowing when Guild Avenue would be going through and was told that a public hearing was scheduled for it the following night, February 2, 1989. 8. OTHER BUSINESS: A. Annual Report. The Commission agreed to table the annual report until the next meeting when Dennis Welsch would be available to present it. Planning Commission Meeting February 1, 1989 Page 8 ADJOURNMENT: A motion to adjourn was made by Rick Carlson, seconded by Marcia Gowling. The motion passed unanimously. kg