HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/11/1989CITY OF APPLE VALLEY
URBAN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE MEETING
APRIL 11, 1989
1. CALL TO ORDER:
The April 11, 1989 Urban Affairs Committee Meeting was called to
order by Chairman John McKay at 7:10 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.
Members Present: Chairman McKay, Shirley Doering, Pamela Sohlberg,
Sharon Schwartz, Jeffrey Weldon.
Members Absent: JoAnne Ellison (work).
Staff Present: Tom Melena, Bruce Erickson, Tom Lawell, Scott Hickok,
Jim Plummer and Dennis Welsch. Ub f L((,(Z oo-
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
The agenda was approved as written.
3. ADOPTION OF TASK AND SCHEDULE:
The Committee adopted Tuesday as its meeting dates. The schedule of
meeting dates, including April 11th, April 25th, May 9th, May 23rd, June
13th, June 27th, July 11th and July 25th, was approved subject to changes
at a later date. The meetings will be held from 7:00 until 8:30 p.m. in
the City Council Chambers. Chairman McKay reviewed the task of the
Committee and recommended that the tasks be broken into decisions which
can be made and forwarded to the Planning Commission and City Council on
an incremental basis. No public hearings are required by the Urban
Affairs Committee. However, the Planning Commission and City Council will
be required to hold hearings, as necessary, on ordinance amendments.
4. ADDITIONAL ITEMS TO BE ADDED TO THE STUDY:
Sharon Schwartz asked the Committee to consider snow removal on
sidewalks as a potential topic.
5. EXTERIOR VEHICLE STORAGE:
Two proposed drafts of an ordinance limiting vehicles stored outside
of a residential garage were distributed to the Committee. One version
proposed a four car exterior storage limit and the requirement for "On-
Site Permits" issued by the City Council for any vehicles beyond four.
Urban Affairs Committee Meeting
April 11, 1989
Page 2
The other version proposed six on exterior vehicle storage spaces per lot
with no allowance for additional vehicles through a permit process.
The City Staff summarized past efforts to enforce on -site, exterior
vehicle storage noting that no ordinance currently allows for clear
enforcement.
Bruce Erickson asked for clarification regarding whether cars could
be parked in the street after the maximum number are parked on the paved
surface within the yard. This may require additional language to solve
this loop hole.
Tom Melena stated the goals of the exterior vehicle storage ordinance
would be to control the unsightliness, the surface oil and fuel
contamination, and the maintenance of lawn areas on and around the edges
of paved surfaces or under stored vehicles.
Scott Hickok noted that inoperable vehicles are covered under the
abandoned vehicles section of the code, but that antique and collector
vehicles are not exempt from this proposed ordinance and must, therefore,
( be included in the four or six vehicles actually allowed on the site.
A general discussion of the Council's direction and the Klingelhut
case ensued.
A discussion of gravel versus hard pavement (concrete or asphalt
driveways) ensued. The Committee asked for clarification on "why six
vehicle units per driveway ?" Dennis Welsch explained that the current
ordinance allows for a 30 foot wide driveway, which is normally 30 feet in
depth as well. This allows for 900 square feet for vehicles. Six
vehicles can be parked on 900 square feet of space.
Tom Melena noted that in Edina, no parking is allowed on the streets
except with a permit process.
Sharon Schwartz noted that abuse also occurs in multi - family and
duplex zones; particularly in the twin home and quad home areas.
Utilizing the six vehicle proposal may be more feasible for large
families, but would be difficult in twin home and quad home situations.
Chairman McKay stated that many times the garage is used for storage;
thus pushing vehicles in the driveway and in to the exterior storage
problem.
Jeffrey Weldon stated that six vehicles per driveway is no solution
in that it is still a visual nuisance. The Six vehicles would not include
recreational vehicles, snowmobiles, boats and trailers.
Urban Affairs Committee Minutes
April 11, 1989
Page 3
Scott Hickok presented background information on the police survey of
the community, indicating that approximately twelve locations within the
community had more than four vehicles in the driveway or per lot.
Bruce Erickson further explained the police survey and noted that the
more stringent the proposed ordinance becomes, the more difficult it will
be to enforce.
Tom Melena stated that the six vehicles per lot may be realistic if
it includes all vehicles in the yard (includes all recreation and utility
vehicles).
Bruce Erickson stated that if Apple Valley uses "On -Site Parking
Permit Process" very specific standards will have to be established to
allow for the issuance of the permits.
Shirley Doering stated that any of these proposals is simply
regulating the many in order to control the few. She asked for a more
flexible type of ordinance. She also asked for clarification regarding
what was a paved surface for non - motorized vehicles and why was it
necessary? This will be discussed at future meetings.
A general discussion ensued regarding the definition of vehicle to
mean cars and trucks, or should the definition also include recreation
vehicles. The size of trucks was also discussed in that Tom Melena has
found that vehicles may range to 1 1/2 tons (trucks) and still meet the
requirements of a small truck or pickup.
MOTION: A motion was made by Member Weldon and seconded by Member
Sohlberg to recommend the adoption of an exterior vehicle storage
ordinance which would allow no more than four vehicles per lawful dwell-
ing unit in "R-1A", 11 R -1B " R -1C ", or "R -2" zoned property. The
definition of vehicles would include any licensed passenger car or truck;
not to exceed 1 1/2 ton. The motion carried.
The Staff was also directed to prepare an addendum to the proposed
ordinance which would include an "On -Site Parking Permit System" and
establish criteria for which the permit could be issued.
The Staff was also directed to complete a draft of the ordinance and
send it to the Urban Affairs Committee for review prior to the Planning
Commission meeting on April 19th.
6. ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
kg