HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/01/1987CITY OF APPLE VALLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
July 1, 1987
Minutes of the meeting of the Apple Valley Planning Commission held Wednesday,
July 1, 1987, at 7:30 p.m. at the Apple Valley City Hall.
PRESENT: Chairperson Robert Erickson; Commission Members Richard Carlson, Frank
Kleckner, Phillip Peterson (7:34 arrival), Virginia Sterling; Staff Members
Rick Kelley, Meg McMonigal, Keith Gordon; City; Council Liaison Gary Humphrey;
31 members of the public. Acting City Adm. John Gretz.
ABSENT: Marcia Cowling, Arleigh Thorberg.
1. Chairperson Erickson called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m.
2. Approval of Agenda:
MOTION: of Carlson, seconded by Sterling, to approve the agenda as presented.
VOTE: Yes, 4; No, 0.
3. Approval of Minutes of June 17, 1987.
Staff indicated the third motion of Item 4 should read as MINUTES
follows: MOTION: of Kleckner, seconded by Cowling, recommending JUNE 17, 198;
approval of the Conditional Use Permit with the restriction that
inoperable or physically damaged vehicles will not be stored outside and
that not more than 20% of the parking spaces be used for outside, overnight
parking.
MOTION: of Carlson, seconded by Kleckner, to approve the Minutes of June 17, 198;
as corrected.
VOTE: Yes, 3; No, 0; Abstain, 1 (Sterling),
4. Public Hearing for Preliminay Plat -- Valley Meadows.
LOCATION East Side of Garden View Drive, South of Heywood Path. PH, PREL PLAT
PETITIONER: American Heartland Homes. VALLEY MEADOG
Chairperson Erickson opened the Public Hearing with the standard opening remarks.
Mr. Kelley presented the petition for a preliminary plat to subdivide property
into townhome lots - -33 proposed dwelling units. Mr. Gordon reported that sanitary
sewer and water are available to the area; no storm sewer is required as water
will drain into catch basins located on Garden View Drive. Mr. Ray Brandt of
Brandt Engineering indicated some adjustments are needed because of the location
of the pipeline and discussions are underway with Williams Bros (pipeline will
be located and indicated on the plat) . Pipeline easements also have to be worked
out with Northern Natural Gas. It was indicated the pipeline companies do not
have problems with the curbs crossing the easements. The plat is showing a
50' street - -this should be a public street of the standard 60' width (not a public
road to dead end into a private road creating an undesirable situation ).
The problem(s) of needed setbacks was discussed with setbacks being deficient in a
number of areas (35' setback to Heywood Path, 25' setback to Palomino Woods lots,
40' setback to Timberwick lots). The property owner indicated he had received
no calls after erecting a sign with the telephone number given. The alternative
if the setback variances were not granted would be, for the petitioner, smaller
units with a higher density. The question was asked as to the history of the
108 unit apartment building which was being planned by the seller of the property- -
this was never proposed. The upper range of the density is 12 units /acre.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
July 1, 1987
Page 2
Speaking at the Public Hearing:
1. Mr. Tom Anglo, 8324 140th St. Ct., AV: indicated he did not know this zoning
existed on the property (M -3) in the ten years he has been a resident at his
current address. Mr. Kelley indicated the existing zoning has been in place
at least since 1978. He indicated he resist the density of the proposal because
of the economic impact on surrounding homes and wondered if this area could be
rezoned at this time. (Mr. Kelley explained the process to him.) The problem
of single family housing on a parcel of this size was discussed.
2. Mr. James M. Fazzowe,, 14107 Garden View Ct., AV: indicated he has no problem
with the proposal but is concerned it will decrease the property values of the
surrounding area (and felt this was a given). He was told the development
would add about an increase of 2% to the existing traffic (3,500 to 4,000 trips
per day on a road that can handle 6,000 tpd).
3, Ms. Patty Fazzowe, 14107 Garden View Ct., AV: indicated they had purchased their
home for the neighborhood and for the location on a cul de sac. They have made
an investment in AV and for a number of reasons were very alarmed when the sign
was erected on the corner of the property. They thought they were in a single
family area and became more alarmed when just two weeks ago the second sign
was erected. She asked why any one would call when the impression on the sign(s)
was that single family homes would be constructed. She is concerned about keeping
the density down. Chair Erickson indicated that the proposal is within the low
density of the existing zoning and he felt that personally this proposal would
look better than single family homes on 50' lots. Ms. Fazzowe indicated that
instead of granting the needed setbacks less units should be constructed. Chair
Erickson indicated the petitioner feels this would not be economically feasible
and the result could be a 72 -unit apartment building. Mr. Carlson said that
he had not heard an alternative proposal with the petitioner indicating that
to delete three lots would mean higher density and to meet City required setbacks
ten lots would have to be deleted. Chair Erickson indicated that a compromise
position perhaps could be reached.
4. Ms. Gail Strider, 8328 140th St. Ct., AV: said that she had moved into her home
two weeks ago and was told by her realtor there would probably never be any buildii
in that location because of the pipeline easements. She indicated concern over
the value of her home; AV is a beautiful community and she feels the surrounding
homeowners are being pushed into this -- either take what is being proposed or there
will be high -rise apartment buildings. The developer indicated he felt the
value of the surrounding properties would increase as a result of this development,
5. Mr. W. F. Tannehill, 8320 140th St. Ct., AV: indicated he did not know the
area was zoned multiple and would just echo the comments already made.
6. Ms. Audrey Dawson, 14034 Heywood Path, AV: indicated her questions had been
answered.
7. Mr. Bill Tschohl, 8130 137th St., W., AV: realtor in AV indicated he paid
$81,000.00 for a townhome on Heywood Path and his only concern is that the
proposed townhomes would be a quality product. He would like to see things
done according to the regulations of the City. He would obviously rather have
30 units than 60 units; he does not think these units will sell with single
car garages. He also expressed concern about the road that it would be the
standard 60'. Mr. Tschohl would not express his opinion regarding property
values if this project were approved.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
July 1, 1987
Page 3
8. Mr. Robert Brunner and Ms. Cella Brunner, 8395 141st Ct., AV: suggested that
a privacy fence be erected so that they would not have all the children from
this project in their yard. The developer would be happy to comply with that
request (6' fence).
9. Mr. Bob Dawson, 14034 Heywood Path, AV: was told the road would not go over the
northern edge of the gas pipeline; there will be a private drive over the pipeline
10. Mr. and Mrs. Many Machu ca, 8385 14st Ct., AV: indicated that they would Rather
have single family home dwellings than apartment b uilding(s) . There is a need
for stricter guidelines -- mowing lawns, general upkeep; he was told there will be
an association of homeowners with guidelines in place which will be public.
11. Mr. Joseph Ketelboeter, 8455 141st CT., AV: was told the units would be 15' from
his backyard. There is a large tree line between his house and the lot line
for the development with the developer indicating he would not cut down any more
trees than necessary and he would not cut the ones of concern to Mr. Ketelboeter.
12. Mr. Everett Wright, 8415 141st Ct., AV: indicated he hs 22' from Unit 12 lot line
This proposal should not be considered just by economics - -why not go back to what
the City wants.
Chair Erickson reiterated that he would like to see some type of compromise to
maintain something closer to the :5 units per acre as proposed.
13. Mr. Roy Erie, 3882 Ballantrae Rd., #6,Eagan - -as a partner in the Valley Meadows
project, he said that he could assure the public that they have taken every step
to design and build homes of the highest possible quality such as cedar siding,
etc. They have taken steps to present a product that will enhance the neighborhoo,
Mr. Wright said that Outlot C dead ends and points directly into his home and
would like to see it required that trees be planted. Landscape screening
materials would be provided.
14. Mr. Machuca felt that perhaps as a solution, there could be a committee composed
of homeowners and the developer to study the possibilities so that a compromise
could be reached. Chair Erickson urged those present to do this and the developer
indicated he would have no problem with working with homeowners.
Mr. Kleckner suggested that berming and landscaping as an alternative to fencing
could be more desirable as fencing tends to become tacky over the years.
15. Ms. Donilla Marchand, 8430 141st Ct., W. AV: expressed concern over the
thoroughfare that could result with children passing through her property.
She indicated that she has previously seen the same type townhomes the
developer is proposing and likes it very much.
No one else wished to speak; therefore, Chair Erickson closed the public hearing with
the standard closing remarks.
The public hearing was closed for the evening with the intent to reopen the public hear
at the July 15, 1987, meeting.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
July 1, 1987
Page 4
Mr. Carlson indicated that a PUT) must occur on 20 acres. The Comp Plan already
carries the density discussed but because of 50' lots being unacceptable other
alternatives for this site have to be presented.
Ms. Sterling indicated she likes the idea of extra parking spaces provided for each
unit.
Mr. Wright would like to see the landscaping plan to be sure that lights do not glow
into his bedroom window.
Mr. Kleckner feels a good product is being proposed but has concern about some of the
setbacks - -with some compromises, this could be a good project.
Mr. Carlson said that he is becoming more concerned that with every project coming
before the Commission, there seems to be more and more compromises that are being
requested and often approved - -he would not want 15' setbacks when the code indicates
40' setbacks are required.
Chair Erickson again indicated that the Public Hearing is being continued to a future
meeting and urges the developer to work with the neighborhood residents; he looks forwa
to seeing the revised plans!
Chair Erickson called a five minute recess with the meeting reconvening at 9:05 p.m.
5. Consideration of Blanket Setback Variances -- Shadow Estates.
LOCATION North Side of T. H. 1177, East of Flagstaff Ave. BLANKET SETB
PETITIONER Dick Winkler. VARIANCES,
SHADOW ESTAT
Ms. McMonigal presented the petition for consideration of front yard setback varian
for lots 11 -14 and 16 -21 in Shadow Estates subdivision. The request is for front
yard variances for 10 lots which back up to the pond area. A 20 foot setback versu
a 30 foot setback would allow the homes to be pulled away from the pond area and
alleviate any potential problems with the slopes and water in.the area.
The roads do line up with the existing streets and the setback variances is the
desired way to proceed.
MOTION: of Kleckner, seconded by Carlson, to approve the 20' front yard setback
variances for lots 11 -14 and 16 -21 in Shadow Estates subdivision, as a
topographic hardship exists in this area.
VOTE: Yes, 5; No, 0.
6. Consideration of Building Permit Authorization for Single Family
Dwelling on Unplatted Land.
LOCATION 12896 Galaxie Ave.
PETITIONER Ross Taylor.
BLDG. PERMIT
SINGLE FAMII
DWELLING,
UNPLATTED LA
Ms. McMonigal presented the petition for Building Permit Authorization
for a single family home on unplatted lot. The petitioner would like to build a
home toward the east or rear of this lot and by building in this location, there is
sufficient room for a road through the front of the lot should this property and
the surrounding properties ever be subdivided. Sewer and water is available off
Foliage Ave.
MOTION: of Sterling, seconded by Carlson, recommending that since this is a lot
of record, the building permit be authorized.
VOTE: YEs, 5; No, 0.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
July 1, 1987
Page 5
7. Sketch Plan Review for Commercial Planned Unit Development Rezoning.
LOCATION East Side of Galaxie Ave. at 146th Street W. SKETCH PLAN
PETITIONER Linvill Properties, Inc. REV., COMM.
PLANNED UNIT
Mr. Kelley presented the Sketch Plan Review for a proposed DEVELOP REZOT
commercial/ industrial Planned Unit Development rezoning. Staff
would be more comfortable with the specific uses that would be allowed in such
a district. Mr. Rollie Crawford of Linvill Properties indicated their experience
with changes in the market place are ones that existing zoning ordinances sometimes
do not contemplate. The desire is to find the flexible tool which would give the
City control but also allow the inclusion of tenants that need the type of space
they can provide. The wording of the PUD that would apply to this property to
contemplate and allow the kind of uses in that area.
Chair Erickson asked if they wish for this to happen- -will retail uses take away frc
retail uses in downtown AV? He was told these are not the typical retail uses that
would go in a downtown area.
Mr. Gretz indicated that he would be concerned with the degree of retail development
and a percentage factor could accompany the agreement.
Council Liaison Humphrey said that as a businessman he would welcome the competitioi
and does not see this retail use as a big problem. He felt that a good strong
look should be given to this proposal for the long-term zoning.
Chair Erickson indicated he would be more comfortable with a list of permitted
uses rather than opening up "Pandora's Box. " He would like to see Staff assemble
a list of permitted uses rather than what would not be permitted.
Mr. Carlson said that he generally favors a PUD approach, but at the same time
consideration must be given to allow for City Council /Staff to maintain adequate
control- -Staff needs to go through this proposal in more detail with adequate
controls being provided.
Mr. Humphrey indicated the entire thing revolves around wholesale /retail- -there is
a need to control low- volume uses.
Mr. Kelley indicated the petitioner would find it difficult to list particular uses
in light of the way business is changing. There may be a way to identify certain
characteristics of an allowable business and include these in the ordinance and to
include a ratio of leased space for retail use, etc.
Ms. Sterling indicated her concern regarding parking her vehicle for getting her
boat in and out for service- -Item 3. Difficulties in the enforcement of the
permitted use occupancies. Mr. Linvill indicated they are very stringent regarding
enforcement. He also indicated certain buildings lend certain. /different flavors
and consideration of other tenants is a must.
Mr. Kleckner agreed that adequate parking must be provided and that he liked
the suggestion of a certain percentage for retail use.
Mr. Carlson suggested that he would like to see the exclusion of the utilization of
semi- tractor trailor trucks parked at a 45 angle advertising tenants. Mr. Linvill
apologized for this happening and said that they immediately told the tenant this
would have to be removed.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
July 1,1987
Page 6
Chair Erickson said that he would welcome additional non - competing uses to the area
with the City maintaining control over what would be allowed. Parking should be
addressed making sure adequate spaces are provided for the proposed users.
Mr. Humphrey felt a long -term look should be given to the Zoning Ordinance and it
should be updated.
8. Other Items.
Comp Plan Meeting -- Wednesday, July 8- -Quick Tour of Different Housing Types
beginning at 7 :30 p.m.
9. Adjourn.
MOTION: of Carlson, seconded by Sterling, to adjourn the meeting at 10:10 p.m.
VOTE: Yes, 5; No, 0.
APPROVED A + I 11 SECRETARY °'IILGI,piytLN ��/�^