Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/21/1995CITY OF APPLE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 21, 1995 1. CALL TO ORDER The City of Apple Valley Planning Commission meeting was called to order at 7:03 p.m. by Chairman Alan Felkner. Members Present: Alan Felkner, Dave Swanson, Karen Edgeton, Paul Oberg, Mazcia Gowling, Diane Nagler, and Frank Blundetto. Members Absent: None. Staff Present: Rick Kelley, Kathy Bodmer, Tom Lovelace, Keith Gordon and Mike Dougherty. Others Present: See the sign-in sheet. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Chair Felkner asked Staff and the Commission members if they had any changes to the proposed agenda. There being none, he called for its approval. MOTION: Member Gowling moved; seconded by Member Blundetto, to approve the draft agenda as amended. The motion carried 7 - 0. 3. APPROVAL OF JUNE. 7,1995 MINUTES Chair Felkner asked Staff and the Conunission members if they had any changes to the draft minutes submitted in the packet. There being. none, he called. for their approval. MOTION: Member Oberg moved, seconded by Member Swanson, to approve the minutes as submitted. The motion carried 5 - 0, with 2 abstentions (Gowling, Nagler). 4. CONSENT ITEMS - None - 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Diamond Path Townhomes II Chair Felkner opened the public hearing with the standazd remarks. The development proposal was introduced by Assistant Planner Kathy Bodmer. This development proposal consists of a rezoning, preliminary plat, site plan, and setback variances. The property is located in the southwest corner of Diamond Path and Pilot Knob Road at the west end of the recently constructed Echo Lane Planning Commission Minutes June 21, 1995 Page 2 dead-end. It is immediately adjacent to the Diamond Path Townhome First Addition. This area is designated on the comprehensive plan for low density multi family at a density range of 3 to 6 units per acre. It is currently zoned agricultural, and the request is to rezone the property M-3C. It also lies within the shoreland overlay district of Farquar Lake. Displaying a series of overhead transparencies, Ms. Bodmer reviewed the existing land uses and their densities. The displays also illustrated the existing topography conditions, and the existence of wetlands on the site and to the south. She also displayed a series of overhead transparencies with photographs of the site that illustrated the disturbed nature of the. existing property. It had been formerly used for a landscape business, and the installation. and removal of numerous nursery stock items has served to disturb the site. The proposed site plan illustrates 26 townhome units, clustered around a public street extension. Because of the soil conditions and existence of wetlands, numerous setback variances have been requested along this public street. This is a similar situation as exists in the Diamond Path First Addition development immediately adjacent to the east. As currently calculated, the density would be 6.2 units/acre, after subtraction of the public street. If a private street were used instead of a public street, the area of the right-of--way could be included in the density calculations which would result in a 5.4 dwelling unit/acre density. The green space area needs to be recalculated; but it appears to be approximately 60%. They would also need to include the 1/2 stall per unit overflow parking which has not yet been illustrated. Also,. the existing storm water ponding easement line on the south boundary of the property needs to be shown. The grading plan illustrates some work being performed in the delineated wetland area. Consequently, replacement wetlands must be installed at a 2 to 1 ratio. The landscape plan does not yet illustrate the foundation plantings around the building; The: building .elevations illustrate a "broken" building which will. be stepped down to better match the existing.. topographic conditions to nunimize the amount of grading. required: The buildings must meet the 50% brick requirement and the building elevations for all building. faces must be shown: Ms. Bodmer then displayed an overhead transparency which showed the layout of the buildings adjacent to the east. Commissioner Oberg asked if any visitor parking was being shown on the site. Ms. Bodmer stated that other than the parking. directly in front of the units on the driveway, the overflow parking stalls were not being shown at this time. Cormnissioner Edgeton had a question concering the different green space calculations versus a public or a private street. Ms. Bodmer noted that the boulevard area of a public street was included in the green space calcuiations so that the only difference would be the fact that a public street is required to have a wider paved surface than a private street. Commissioner Edgeton also asked if the wetland area was counted as green space. Ms. Bodmer replied that it was. Commissioner Edgeton then asked if there was room to expand the mitigated wetland area to the west to meet the 2 to 1 requirement. Ms. Bodmer stated that she thought so, but the developer would have to redraw the plans to confirm this. Planning Commission Minutes June 21,1995 Page 3 Commissioner Gowling asked how long the cul-de-sac was relative to the City requirements. Ms. Bodmer replied that the maximum permitted by City ordinance is about 1,000 feet. With the extension being proposed for this development, the total length of Echo Lane would be 750 feet. Commissioner Nagler asked a question concerning wetland delineation in dry years. Ms. Bodmer responded that the wetland delineation evaluates both the soils, existing plants, and hydrology, and that this evidence is present even in a dry year. She also noted that the existing culvert under the driveway to the old farmstead would be replaced with a storm sewer to drain the northern wetland at its flood elevation. Tom Bisch of Heritage Development then approached the Commission. He said that this is an extremely diffrcult site to develop given the nature of the existing wetlands and poor soil conditions. He said that the density is slightly lower than the first phase located directly to the east, and that the development costs for the improvements and soil corrections on the site are quite a bit higher. He said that they would prefer to construct a private street in this area because ofthe lower constnzction costs, but understands the City's desire to extend the existing dead end of Echo Lane into a standard wl-de- sac. For this reason they are requesting the setback variances in order to achieve the minimum density that they believe is necessary to pay for the development cost of the site. He said that they are not completely clear on how the green space code. requirement is calculated, but that they will use their best efforts to meet the 60% standard. Chair Felkner asked ifthey will. be able to meet the 50% brick requirement. Mr. Bisch stated that they would. Commissioner Edgeton asked if they would be able to meet the half stall per unit visitor overflow parking requirement. Mr. Bsch stated that their engineer has told them that the 13 required parking stalls can in fact be fit into the development. Chair Felkner then opened the public hearing to audience comments. Firnun Alexander of 12837 Eastview Curve stated that he resided in the adjacent Radcliff Townhome area and was opposed to the. rezoning and development as proposed.. He said that he moved to this area to be near the existing woods, hills, and ponds, and that while he is not opposed to townhome development on the site, he is opposed to this particular layout. He said that it does not respect the existing natural conditions and caL'ed for a different layout will-. less density arcd n•.ore preservation of the wetland and wooded areas. At this point an unidentified woman in the audience asked that more trees be saved in the development. Chair Felkner asked Staff to have the City Forester review the existing trees on the site to make a better determination on what can or should be saved. Pat Cropsey of 12626 Driftwood Lane stated that he works for Gonyea Land Company, which is the broker for the sale of this property. He said that he understands both issues on the side of Planning Commission Minutes June 21, 1995 Page 4 developing property and thinks that this proposal will only be an improvement to the site. He said that if the project is not approved, it is his opinion that the site will sit vacant for quite some time. Therese Johnson of 25550 Dupont Avenue said that she is the spouse of the current property owner, and that it is important to remember that some of the trees being referred to are part of the nursery stock from the landscape operation and are intended to be removed. Chair Felkner again asked that the forester and the developer work together to identify which trees will be saved, and which will be sold. He then asked if there were any more public comments. There being none, he closed the public hearing with. the standard remarks, stating that the item will appear on future Commission agendas until a decision and recommendation can be made for the City Council.. The next Planning Comnssion meeting will be on July 19th, 1995. SB. Nordic Woods Lot Split Chair Felkner opened the public hearing with the standard remarks. Associate Planner Tom Lovelace presented the item, which is located at 6700-6704 132nd Street West. The property is currently occupied by a duplex dwelling. The public hearing is to consider a subdivision of land to create a new lot line that would run down the common wall between the dwelling units. Each dwelling unit- could then be sold and occupied individually. Mr. Lovelace noted that there are currently separate utility services. to each. dwelling. unit, and that the common wall is in fact a fire rated party wall between the units to accommodate the new lot line. The Commission asked that the party wall. existence be verified via an on site inspection. Chair Felkner then asked if there were any members of the audience who wished to address this hearing. There being none, he closed the hearing. with the standard remarks. He noted that while it is the policy of the Commission not to act the night of the hearing, on items such as this which are non-controversial they make an exception. MOTION: Member Swanson moved, seconded by Member Oberg, to recommend approval of the subdivision. as proposed. The motion carried 7 - 0. 6. LAND USE/ACTION ITEMS A. White Oak Ridge Residential Variance Assistant Planner Tom Lovelace presented the item which involves three vacant lots in the White Oak Ridge subdivision. Mr. Lovelace displayed a number of overhead transparencies which illustrated the location of the lots and the nature of the request. These three lots abut an unconstructed street known as Eleanor Lane. Much of the right of way for this unconstructed street actual lies within a wetland area, which is the reason. the street has never been constructed. The current owner of the three lots, Pulte Homes, wishes to install a shared private driveway across a portion of this unconstructed street right of way and continue the private driveway across the Planning Commission Minutes June 21, 1995 Page 5 front of the three lots in order to provide a physical access to the property. A home would then be built on each of the three lots. Some of this driveway construction would occur within a wetland area, which means that a 2 to 1 wetland mitigation must be accomplished. The end of the shared private driveway would contain an emergency vehicle turnaround constructed to City specifications. Commissioner Nagler had a question over Lot Number 14, which is slightly under the 40,000 square foot minimum lot requirement in the R-1 zoning district. It was noted that this was an existing lot of record and was entitled to be built upon even though it was less than the current zoning district requires. The Commission asked Staff to present them. with information concerning the ordinance defmition of a buildable lot of record. City Attorney Mike Dougherty also attempted to explain. the status of the three existing lots that had frontage along an unconstructed road right of way: He stated that the request for the use of a private drive is not technically a variance in terms. of needing to determine an unusual hardship for approval. He said the issue before the Commission is a recommendation concerning the manner in which the physical access to the property is to be constructed in order to serve those lots and not the right of access itself. The right of access is already being provided by the existence of that street right of way, even though it has not been built upon. The issue before the Commission is whether or not to allow the private parties to construct their own shared driveway across the street right of way, or to recommend that the City proceed with the construction of a complete public street section within that dedicaied right of way. There was a general discussion concerning. the location of the street right of way lines relative to the property lines for the lots themselves. There was also some discussion concerning the amount of drainage to the existing pond in this area, particularly as it related. to the. front yards of the new lots being. created. in the Walnut Hills development located to the northeast: Commissioner Edgeton asked which would be less. disruptive to the natural environment of the pond -- the private drive as proposed or a full City street. Mr. Lovelace stated that the private drive would be less disruptive. City Engineer Keith Gordon noted that most of the private drive that is being proposed would actually be outside of the right of way on the front yard area of the existing high ground of those three lots. Commissioner Nagler asked about the on site erosion control issues. Mr. Lovelace stated that the Department of Natural iZesources review noted that there were no silt fence locations indicated on the plan, and that that should be included. He also noted that the 2 to 1 mitigation requirement is occurring both on the site here, as well as within the creation of some additional ponding and wetland areas within the Walnut Hills area to the northeast. Commissioner Swanson asked the City Attorney if the City did not approve the use of a private drive to serve these lots, would the petitioner have the right to request the City to install a public street within that right of way. Mike Dougherty responded that that would probably be the case. Planning Commission Minutes June 21, 1995 Page 6 Gary Grant of Pulte Homes approached the Commission and stated that the private driveway would be governed by a restrictive covenant filed against the three lots for joint sharing of the cost of maintenance and snow removal so that it would not be done at any City expense. This covenant is under review by the City Attorney's ofTice. Mr. Grant also noted that one of the neighbors had commented on the safety of this private drive since it was adjacent to the pond. He said that they are looking at a design that would have a guard rail on the side next to the pond. Mr. Grant also noted that the use of a private drive to serve these lots had been discussed before, and referred to previous discussions between the City and the former property owners, the Petter Family. He said that thus far they have reviewed the plans with the Department. of Natural Resources and the Army Corps of Engineers, and that those parties agree that the use of a private drive would be much less disruptive to the pond than a full blown public street. Commissioner Edgeton asked that if a multifamily development were being. proposed, would any type of variance be necessary for the use of a shared. private driveway. City Attorney Mike Dougherty stated no, but that the issue of the private drive crossing an existing street right of way would still have to be addressed. He also noted that if this was a new proposal for a complete multifamily project that did not have an existing right of way; this issue would not even be discussed because it would all be privately owned. Lion Bastyr, the planner for Pulte Homes; displayed a colored overhead transpazency to better illustrate the location.. of the existing shoreline of the lake and pond, as well as the construction limits and location of the silt fence. He said that all of the building pads for the homes would be out of any delineated wetland azea and would be a nunimum of three feet above the ordinary high water level and beyond the minimum required setbacks. He said that the private drive would be about 3-1/2 feet above existing grade. They would install a culuert at the north end to allow passage of surface water from the adjacent single family property to continue to get to the pond. He said that all. of the grading work illustrated. on the plan would occur within the wetland between the shoreline of the pond and the high ground, and that none of it would be occurring within any of the existing open water itself. He said that they are trying to provide a physical access which disrupts the natural environment as little as possible. He said that the silt fence posts will be placed four feet on center, as opposed to the eight foot on center standazd in order to provide a higher level of assurance that no erosion would get into the pond itself. He said that once. the grading was complete; they would utilize a sprayable cement mat that contains seed in order to revegetate and secure the newly constructed slopes to prevent erosion. He said that this particuiaz product is 1.00% guaranteed to prevent erosion. in response to a suggestion that the drive go around the. west side of the pond, he noted that this would be a much longer driveway and would actually require more work and alteration within the existing wetland. He said that the current plan shows 8,000 square feet of wetland being altered and 1.6,000 square feet of wetland mitigation being created. He said that the sanitary sewer lines would be constructed about 2-1/2 feet above the water table, and that their surveyor has actually field located the ordinary high water line contour on the property to verify the minimum 75 foot setback from Long Lake. He said that the house plans illustrated on the plan are truly conceptual and were drawn in order to demonstrate the meeting of the minimum 75 foot setbacks and 20 foot sideyard setbacks, as well as the 30 foot front street setback. Planning Commission Minutes June 21,1995 Page 7 Commissioner Oberg asked what the slope or grade from the private road down to the pond would be. Mr. Bastyr stated that it would fall about 6 to 7 feet within 20 feet which results in a 3 to 1 slope. Commissioner Oberg asked for what length of the private drive this slope would occur. Mr. Bastyr stated that it was for about a 100 foot length of the driveway. Commissioner Nagler asked about the retaining wall materials used at the driveway turnaround: Mr. Bastyr stated that they would use either a keystone or diamond block construction with a guard rail on top. Commissioner Edgeton asked about the house footprint size: Mr. Bastyr stated that for the conceptual drawings they used a 2,000 square foot building pad for a rambler, and a 1,500 square foot building pad fora 2-story home. He said that by using these lazger conceptual building pads, they don't believe there would be any necessity to have a future property owner request a building setback variance for a house. Commissioner Swanson asked if the 20 foot wide private driveway would be hard surfaced prior to starting any of the house construction. Mr. Bastyr stated that the first thing to prepare these lots for development would be to install the utilities and do the grading and road surfacing. Commissioner Swanson asked who the neighbor was that raised the issue of the guard rail to be constructed along the pond. Mr. Grant stated that. he does not remember that person's. name, but does remember the comment: Comnssioner Nagler asked what the width. of the turnaround area was. Mr. Bastyr stated that it is illustrated as being 10 feet in width,. but that.. it could be widened to 15 feet. Commissioner Edgeton. asked when. the road right of way was actually platted. Mr: Dougherty stated that it was around 1955 or 1956, and that this was in fact one ofthe first plats filed in the City. Commissioner Blundetto stated that he understood the concerns of the adjacent neighbor, especially with the new development occurring to the north. He said that he feels somewhat trapped in making a decision in that the. issue appeazs to be the width of the road or driveway to provide access to these lots rather than whether or not the lots should be built upon. Chair Felkner asked the City Attorney if in fact this is the correct perspective from a legal viewpoint. City Attorney Mike Dougherty responded that these are existing lots and are entitled to access, but the City can determine the manner and the design standards for the construction of that physical improvement. Commissioner Nagler asked about street vacation procedures, particularly as it related to the vacation of the unconstructed stub from Eleonor Lane that dead-ended into. Long Lake itself. City Attorney Mike Dougherty explained the procedure to vacate right of way if it is determined that it is not needed for any public purpose. In the case of that vacated stub, all other lots were provided access via the other portions of Eleonor Lane and consequently had an alternate access. The City Panning Commission Minutes June 21, 1995 Page 8 would not be able to vacate streets if the lots which were currently served by that street haue no alternate access. There was some discussion about the covenants. for the three Pulte lots being modified to allow the other vacant lot to the west (Lot 12) to become a party to the covenant at some future point in order to utilize that shared driveway as well. An issue was also raised relative to the public utilities (sanitary sewer and water) that would be installed to serve these three lots, and at what point the City's obligation to maintain the service would end and obligation would then become the responsibility of the individual homeowner. Chair Felkner then stated that while this is not a public. hearing he would take comments from interested neighbors. Allyn Zelenka of 5280 132nd Street West stated that while the DNR and Army Corps of Engineers have looked at this, the Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District has not yet done so. She said that Brian Watson of the Soil and Water Conservation District stated that he wanted to review the plans. She also said that she understood that Pat Lynch of the DNR had asked for an easement to be created over the wetland mitigation area:. Chair Felkner suggested that an on site tour by all of the interested agencies occur. Ron Dorken of 5290 132nd Street West stated that not all truths are being. presented about the proposal at this time. He said that the Pettey Family is currently the owner of the pond lot in the center of the area (Lot 11J and said that he doesn't think the City has the right to allow construction of a private driveway across a public street right of way. He said that he does not believe that the municipal utilities as designed for these three lots will actually fiznction correctly, and that the berm upon which. the driveway would be constructed is far too tall; he said it looks like it's about 7 feet high. Commissioner Edgeton asked Mr. Dorken if he would prefer construction of a public street instead. City Engineer Keith Gordon said it would be at the same elevation.. Chair Felkner asked the City Engineer to review the. comments on the. design of the sanitary sewer, as well as the drainage issues relative to the proposed culvert. Mr. Dorken went on to say that the pond elevation is currently two feet higher than Long Lake, and that the City has recognized that this is a problem in that it has a proposal to connect the pond to the lake via a storm sewer to drain the pond; this will ultirnately res-alt iii the raising ofboth Farquar and Long Lakes. Chair Felkner asked City Attorney Mike Dougherty what impact the use of the unconstructed street right of way for private driveway use would have on the City. Mr. Dougherty responded that it would. have rio effect in that the public right of way would always remain public. Chair Felkner asked Rick Kelley and the other Planning Staff to list where else in the City private drives or roadways are being used across City public right of ways for comparison purposes. Commissioner Edgeton also asked that this be listed as it related to multifamily projects. Planning Commission Minutes June 21, 1995 Page 9 Commissioner Nagler also asked that the length of these private drives in either single family or multifamily areas be listed. Chair Felkner also asked for the rationale to be detailed about using curb versus not using curb on the private drive: Commissioner Blundetto asked the City Attorney if the City would continue to have the option at a later date to actually construct the street within the Eleonor Lane right of way. Mike Dougherty responded that it would always have that right. Cindy Dorken of 5290 132nd Street West. stated that she has the same concerns as her husband over this project. She said that the water level in this pond is increasing, and that any connection to Long Lake will adversely impact Long and Farquar Lakes. She said that if construction. of a public road in the Eleonor Lane right of way is too costly, it proves. to her that the use of these Lots for building homes is not viable. Chair Felkner asked Staff to provide. the Commission with information on how the cost of road installation would be paid for and apportioned to abutting lots. Commissioner Edgeton asked for a more definitive definition of what "buildable lot" is. Jim Walkowiak of 5230 132nd Street West said that he doesn't believe the plans being presented here are drawn to scale. He said that he walks across the frozen pond during winter time, and does not believe that there is enough land on the. other side of the pond adjacent to the lake to actually build homes. He asked if anyone had actually walked on the site. Ron Bastyr said that all the plans being shown are drawn. to scale and. are the result of field survey work. from actually. examining the site. Mr: Walkowiak asked about the 20 foot wide private. driveway. He asked what the slope was from 132nd Street. Mr. Bastyr stated that it drops between 1 and 1-1/2 feet from the street, and then rises back up to meet the lots. He said that their surveyor field located all of the. open water which is being avoided by their plans. Gary Grant of Pulte Homes noted that the surveyors are under contract from Pulte Homes and are not directly employed by them. Ron Dorken stated that he does not believe Pulte Homes is using the actual findings of the surveyors. There was a general discussion among the audience in a dispute over the buildability of the three lots. The consensus was. that they were told the street was to be vacated at one time and that there would be one buildable site left. after consolidation of those three lots. City Engineer Keith Gordon stated that the vacation of the street and consolidation of the three lots into one was something that had been discussed between the City and the former property owner, the Petter Family. The City was responding to a request at that time and was not requiring that consolidation or the vacation of the street. Planning Commission Minutes June 21, 1995 Page 10 Mr. Dorken stated that he had been told that these lots were not buildable, and that there would never be a street there. An unidentified female member of the. audience expressed a concern that the Commission was not taking their concerns seriously. Commissioner Edgeton stated that it was important to remember that the Planning Commission is made up of volunteer residents of the City, and that they attempt to do what they believe is in the best interest for the City as a whole. Chair Felkner stated that there is obviously more information that needs to be generated before the Commission would be able to act on this item at a future meeting. Chair Felkner then called a recess at 9:43 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 9:54 p.m. 6B. Landmark Corner Community Development Director Rick Kelley presented the item which is located on the northeast comer of the intersection of Cedar Avenue and County Road 42. The property is currently caned under a planned. unit development for a variety of commercial uses, and it is proposed to construct a combination restaurant, banquet facility, and 64 unit hotel on the site. Mr. Kelley displayed a series. of overhead transparencies that identified. the site; as well as the site plan and building elevations. The hotel would contain. 64 units and be four stories. in height. The predominant building material would be brick on all of the structures, with some cedar siding for accent along the top portions and trim areas of the hotel building. Mr: Kelley noted that several variances aze being requested based on the fact that Cedar Avenue is going to be widened, and there is a requirement for dedication of an additional 25 feet of right of way on the west side of the property. Consequently, the buildings have to be shi8ed somewhat to the east and north, which brings them closer than they would ordinarily have to be to Glazier Avenue. He said that based on the taking of additional right of way, Staff is recommending approval of this variance. John Voss, representing the Shervoss Partnership, who is the developer of the property, and Schuman Howell, the architect for the project, made themselves available to answer questions of the Commission concerning their project. There was discussion concerning the amount of landscaping. being provided along Cedaz Avenue adjacent to the pazking lot, as well as the clumsy azrangement of the parking at the entry to the site at Glazier Avenue. Commissioner Oberg expressed concern over the large parking lot which would actually be viewed from the intersection of Cedaz Avenue and County Road 42. Commissioner Blundetto had additional questions concerning the parking stalls at the entry onto Glazier. He asked if the City could require less parking in order to eliminate those stalls. Planning Commission Minutes June 21,1995 Page 11 Commissioner Oberg asked for. a more detailed analysis about the required parking stalls, particularly the assumption that there would be 80% utilization every night.. John Voss said that the real parking crunch comes into existence because of the banquet facility. He said that the hotel with 64 rooms and 2 employees at any one time would require 66 parking stalls, and that the Old Chicago restaurant with. seating capacity of 200 to 220 would require 100 parking stalls, resulting in a total of 166 just for the full time operations of the site. He said that they have made an offer to the Montessori School on the adjacent property to lease 28 of those parking stalls for the evening hours, and will typically need those on Friday and Saturday nights for employee. parking. He said they need every one of the 178 stalls shown on the plan. He noted there would. be a three foot high berm and plantings along County Road 42 to buffer the appearance of the. pazking, and that along Cedar Avenue they intend to install a low hedge since there is not enough room to build a berm. Directly at the corner of Cedaz and County Road 42 they intend to construct a 3 to 4 foot high timber wall with plantings, and to floodlight the area. Chair Felkner asked what signage is being proposed. John Voss stated that they have not determined that yet. The azchitect then presented an original rendering of the restaurant showing a brick and stucco exterior, but which did not show the attached. banquet facility. Mr. Voss stated that approximately 10% of the restaurant and banquet facility occupancy will actually be patronage from the hotel. There was an extended discussion among the Commission members on possible alternatives to eliminate the need for the parking. stalls at the northeast entry drive to Glazier Avenue. Commissioner Edgeton noted that the construction of a banquet facility in this complex was actually a requirement of the City's Economic Development Authority as a condition of selling the property: MOTION: Member Edgeton moved, seconded. by Member Cowling, to recommend approval of the variances for setback and height requirements in accordance with the plans. Commissioner Nagler asked if the: setback variances included. the parking area in the northeast comer. Commissioner Edgeton said that they did include that parking area, and that she did not wish to separate the motion at this time. Ch air Felkner called far a vote, motion carried 4 - 3 ($lundetto, Oberg, Nagler). At this time, the three opposing Commissioners stated that their only reason for voting against this dealt with the potential parking and circulation problems created by the design in the northeast corner. MOTION: Member Edgeton moved, seconded by Member Cowling, to recommend approval of the site plan and building permit authorization in accordance with the Staff report and subject to the relocation of the hotel dumpster, documentation of at least 20 offsite employee parking stalls via a lease, and documentation of landscape improvements meeting the 2-1/2% cost requirement. Planning Commission Minutes June 21, 1995 Page 12 Commissioner Edgeton stated that she hopes that the proposed valet parking be seriously considered to alleviate the potential parking issues. Mr. Voss stated that they will continue to work on that, as well as looking at any possible solution to the parking at the entry area. Comrissioner Nagler stated that the parking stalls at the entrance continue to be of great concern to her and some of the other members. The motion carried 4 - 3 (Blundetto, Oberg, Nagler). MOTION: Member Edgeton moved, seconded by Member Cowling, to recommend approval of the waiver of platting to readjust the common lot line boundary. The motion carried 7 - 0. 6C. Christison Side Setback Variance Assistant Planner Tom Lovelace presented this issue located at 149 Oakwood Road. He stated that the property owner wishes to construct a two stall garage for which he needs a street sideyard setback variance. The property is a corner lot and the side on which the garage would be constructed is adjacent to Strese Lane. The site plan submitted by the property owner indicates a 14.74 foot setback from the street right of way. line instead of the. 20 foot setback required by the zoning ordinance. Mr. Lovelace noted that Strese Lane is an older street in the community and is constructed at a narrower width than other streets in the community on the same sized or width right of way. Essentially this means that there is three feet more boulevard area so that the physical appearance of the proposed garage. would be at a 17.74 setback from the imputed property line. Commissioner Oberg asked Mr. Christison. if he intends to convert the existing single stall garage into a storage area or family room. Mr. Christison stated that he is not anticipating that now, but might do it at sometime in the future. It is a remodeling job that many people in the neighborhood have akeady done. Mr. Christison went on to state that. he currently has three vehicles and needs to have all three vehicles housed during the wintertime. Commissioner Blundetto asked what the hardship appeared to be. Mr. Lovelace noted that in this older part of Apple Valley many of the homes are already constructed at less than the currently required setbacks. Essentially the request is to treat this property in a similar fashion as adjacent properties akeady have been treated. MOTION: Member Cowling moved, seconded by Member Swanson, to recommend approval of the setback variance in accordance with the Staff recommendations. The motion carried 7-0. 7. DISCUSSION TTEMS - None - Planning Commission Minutes June 21, 1995 Page 13 8. OTHER BUSINESS - None - 9. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Member Blundetto moved, seconded by Member Nagler, to adjourn the meeting. The motion carried 7 - 0, the meeting adjourned of 10:55 p.m.