HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/09/1989C
CITY OF APPLE VALLEY
URBAN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE MEETING
MAY 9, 1989
1. CALL TO ORDER:
The May 9, 1989 Urban Affairs Committee Meeting was called to order
by Chairman John McKay at 7:04 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.
Members Present: Chairman McKay, Shirley Doering, (7:35 p.m.)
Pamela Sohlberg, Sharon Schwartz, Jeffrey Weldon, and Jeannine Churchill.
Members Absent: JoAnne Ellison.
Staff Present: Tom Melena, Bruce Erickson, Scott Hickok, and
Dennis Welsch.
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
The agenda was approved as written.
3. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES:
The minutes of the April 25, 1989 Urban Affairs Committee Meeting
were approved as written.
4. REVIEW OF THE PROPOSED CAR AND TRUCK PARKING ORDINANCE AS RECOMMENDED
BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
A general discussion ensued regarding the implications of the
ordinance passed by the Planning Commission with a recommendation sent to
the City Council Member Weldon asked for clarification regarding the 4
to 6 vehicles; asking whether the fifth and sixth vehicles will always
require a permit, (Yes). Bruce Erickson noted for the committee, the
ordinance as currently written still does not enforce or solve the problem
of a 3 to 6 a.m. ban on all vehicle street parking.
City Administrator, Tom Melena, suggested that the Urban Affairs Com-
mittee attempt to correct the off street parking problems now, and then go
back at a later date to correct the street parking problems that may occur
related to the 3 to 6 a.m. enforcement problem.
The committee noted that in Section 2, paragraph 4, Roman Numeral
III, sub - paragraph 2 the word "adjacent" should read "abutting ".
Scott Hickok noted that the administrative fee stipulated in Section
2, Roman Numeral III, sub - section 3 should read "as established by the
City Council in a ordinance." Clarification was provided regarding the
definition of vehicle as stated in Section 2, paragraph 4, Roman Numeral
I, and regarding inoperable cars which were covered under the junk
ordinance. Within Section 4 of the ordinance Member Weldon asked that the
reference to gender as in "her office" be restated as in the "City Clerks
office ".
Urban Affairs Committee Meeting
May 9, 1989
Page 2
Staff was asked to look into the issue of vehicles parking on side-
walks especially in the Greenleaf Trail area.
MOTION: Moved by Member Sohlberg, seconded by Member Schwartz to
recommend approval of the ordinance with the above noted corrections. The
motion carried 5 to nothing. (Member Doering had not arrived at this
time).
5. DISCUSSION OF STAFF SUGGESTIONS OF RECREATION VEHICLES PAVEMENT AND
SCREENING.
Dennis Welsch suggested the following:
1. Driveways and paved areas should be approved by permit only
through the building inspection services.
2. The location of paved parking surfaces should be:
A. Within 20 feet of the main structure.
B. Paved parking surfaces not to exceed 30% of the front yard
in square footage.
C. Set back 5 feet from any side or rear lot line.
3a. Screening: (Alternative #1)
A. A 6 foot fence or vegetation to screen all paved parking
surfaces.
B. All new and existing paved parking areas on the side or
rear of the house structure must be screened from abutting
properties.
C. Screening must be completed within one year after adoption
or issuance of the permit, thus allowing for adaption by
pre- existing uses or time to allow new plant materials to
grow to the required six foot height.
3b. Screening: (Alternative #2)
A. Grandfather all pre- existing paved surfaces.
B. Require permits on all future paving and require screening
as a condition of the permit.
3c. No screening requirements added to the ordinance. (Alternative
#3) i
Urban Affairs Committee Meeting
May 9, 1989
Page 3
Recreation Vehicles:
Amend the current definition of "vehicle" within the newly
recommended ordinance by the Planning Commission to include
RVs. RVs are to be defined as recreational vehicles which
are motorized but this would not include boats.
Allow recreation vehicles as one of the 4 permitted
exterior parked, vehicles "on- site ", or up to 6 with a
permit allowed for exterior paved parking surfaces within
the lot.
The Urban Affairs Committee discussed the 3:00 AM to 6:00 AM parking
ban ordinance and the reasons for prohibition of parking on the streets to
include identification of vehicle, safety, snow removal, and traffic
movement.
Tom Melena asked the Urban Affairs Committee to consider whether they
really wanted to add regulations on recreation vehicles. Scott Hickok
stated that one of the reasons for attempting to pave under recreation
vehicles and other trailers or equipment in the yard is to control the
weeds and rodents. He noted that most of the complaints he received
regarding equipment relates to motorized vehicles and the messiness around
them.
Member Schwartz stated that there is an aesthetic value difference
regarding recreation vehicles. Some look tacky adjacent to a garage.
Scott Hickok noted that there are examples of vehicles for sale in yards
throughout the community especially along Galaxie Avenue where boats and
campers are parked in the rear yard facing Galaxie. Tom Melena reiterated
"What is the rational for regulating recreation vehicles ?" Scott Hickok
stated that one of the reason is the mess created. A bigger problem is the
impact on the neighbors adjacent to the site rather then the owner of the
recreation vehicle. Member Schwartz noted that she was concerned about
the safety of placing vehicles throughout the yards whether then in a
confined area.
Shirley Doering explained the cost and rational of paving surfaces in
cul -de -sacs, noting that concrete slabs could not be poured in less than
In fnnt cnrtinnc anrd cvnlaininn the rnct of a Rliie Cnrure h or a six
foot high fence maybe to exorbitant for property owners. She stated that
limiting the number of vehicles unnecessarily regulates the homeowner.
Chairman McKay stated that he was concerned about attempting to regu-
late boats in an area where boats are a very common recreational vehicle.
Urban Affairs Committee Meeting
May 9, 1989
Page 4
Member Schwartz asked if complaints could be brought to the committee
to demonstrate the problem. She expressed opposition to screening, 5 foot
set backs, and paving for recreational vehicles. Planner Hickok noted
that while we may not be able to ban vehicles, it may be important to
simply organize and limit the number of vehicles because as the community
ages, the problem will get worse. Code enforcement for cleanliness and
organization becomes more important. Member Churchill noted that clutter
is actually the neighbors problem and that the neighbor cannot do anything
about it.
A general discussion ensued regarding what was reasonable and what
was not. Chairman McKay asked the committee to create regulations which,
if anything, protect individual rights.
Tom Melena noted that boat owners and travel trailer owners may not
need any regulation.
A general discussion of boat parking logic ensued.
Sharon Schwartz stated that she liked the idea of requiring vehicles
to park within 20 feet of the main structure. There was a consensus among
the members that they did like the idea of containing the parking areas to
the proximity of the main structure thus not allowing vehicles to be
parked on the fringes of the lot. Captain Erickson asked the committee to
clarify what was meant by paved surface, noting that paved surface may
mean only blocks under the wheels or it may mean an entire concrete slab
under the entire vehicle. The consensus of the committee was that paving
meant hard sufaces such as concrete, asphalt, or brick pavement under the
entire vehicle. Shirley Doering asked the committee to consider whether
utility trailers should be required to be placed on paved surfaces or
would a rock base be adequate.
Summarizing the issues, Chairman McKay stated the consensus that the
following items should be allowed on gravel surfaces: (1) Non - motorized
vehicles, (2) Utility trailers, (3) Boats. He noted that all vehicles
should be parked within 20 to 25 feet of the main structure. Chairman
McKay also summarized the consensus regarding motorized recreational
vehicles: Motorized recreational vehicles should be included in the
definition of vehicles in the ordinance passed by the Planning Commission
and not allowed to exceed 4 except up to 6 with a permit. The Commission
also agreed that there should be building permits issues for all new
concrete or hard surface paved driveways.
A general discussion ensued regarding whether the recreation vehicles
should be allowed in addition to the 4 to 6 vehicles. Tom Melena noted
that the recreation vehicles must be parked on the paved surface within
the lot lines, not in the street.
Urban Affairs Committee Meeting
May 9, 1989
Page 5
There was no action taken on the fencing, vegetation, or screening
issues.
6. ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting adjourned at 8:33 p.m.
sb