Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/04/1997CITY OF APPLE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JilNE 4, 1997 1. CALL TO ORDER The City of Apple Valley Planuh~g Commission meeting was called to order at 7:04 p.m.. Members Present: Alan Fellmer, Diane Nagler, Ice McNamara and Karen Edgeton. Members Abserrt: Frank Blundetto, Marcia Gowling, and Paul Oberg 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 Fellmer asked Staff and the Commission members if they were any other changes to the proposed agenda. Rick Kelley noted that item SB, the public hearing for the Red Oak Haven subdivision, had been withdrawn. Chair Fellarer stated that he wished to add another item under 8, Other Business, to discuss with the Commission. There being no other changes, Chair Fellmer called for the amended agenda to be approved. MOTION: Edgeton moved, seconded by McNamara, to approve the agenda as amended. The motion carried 4 - 0. 3. APPROVAL OF MAY 21,1997 MINUTES Chair Fellarer asked Staff and the Commissioners ifthey had any changes to the draft minutes submitted in the packet. There being none, he called for their approval. MOTION: Edgeton moved, seconded by McNamara, to approve the minutes. The motion carved 4-0. 4. CONSENT ITEMS - None - 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. U.S. Postal Addition Chair Fellmer opened the public hearing with the standard remarks. Assistant Planner Kathy Bodmer identified the location of the proposed preliminary plat as the northwest corner of 153rd Street and Garrett Avenue. The property is designated on the wmprehensive plan for retail business use and is wnsistently zoned "RB" Retail Business. The preliminary plat is a single lot plat to subdivide property off for purposes of construction of a replacement post office in Apple Valley. The developer, Winkler Development, is responsible to obtain subdivision approval, and then the site would be purchased and constructed upon by the U.S. Postal Service. Bodmer noted that the U.S. Postal Service is not subject to building permit review and approval by the city, so, upon acquisition of the property, they will construct the building in accordance with Planning Commission Minutes June 4, 1997 Page 2 their standards. The U. S. Postal Service has indicated, however, that they will work with the city to try to meet all city setback and building appearance standards, ahhough they aze not subject to them. The property is just under 4 1/3 acres in size, and some of the missing ring route amenities along 153rd Street will need to be installed, consisting ofthe dewrative fence, bollards and benches. Bodmer noted that the draft site plan does indicate that the postal delivery vehicles will all be stored within the building. Jim Sturm of J.R. Hill & Associates approached the podium. He stated he is representing the developer and can answer questions concemin~ the plat, but they do not have any involvement with the U.S. Postal Service. Commissioner McNamara asked for a clarification on the city's lack of authority to review a building to be cansh acted by the Postal Service. City Attorney Mike Dougherty noted that the federal government has the overview for all of its properties within the United States and it exempts itself from any state and local regulations. Conunissioner Nagler asked if city staff had any problems with the proposed site plan. Bodmer stated they have not identified any problems with the proposed site plan at this time. Nagler asked if the proposed site plan meets the city's setback requiremerts. Bodmer stated the current site plan does meet all of the setback requirements. Commissioner Edgeton asked who would install the ring route amenities. Bodmer stated that the provision for the installation ofthese will be handled by the developer, Winkler Developmerrt. McNamara asked how many vehicles would be stored inside. Bodmer noted that the site plan and schematic floor plan indicated 42 vehicles would be stored indoors. Chair Fellarer then opened the public hearing to general audience comments. There being none, he then closed the hearing with the standard remazks. He noted that while it is the policy of the Commission not to act on an item the same night as its public hearing, they have in fact acted on non-controversial items for which no outstanding issues remain unresolved. He said he would, therefore, entertain a motion to send this item on to the City Council. MOTION: Nagler moved, seconded by McNamara, to recommend approval of the prelirniuazy plat ofthe U.S. Postal Addition, subject to the installation ofthe missing ring route amenities. Motion carried 4-0. 6. LAND USE/ACTION ITEMS A. Prairie Crossing Kathy Bodmer presented this item, which concerns property located on the south side of County Road 42, north and west of Dodd Boulevard. The property is currently designated on the city's comprehensive plan for low density uses. It is proposed to include a minor comprehensive plan amendment to establish a small "NC" Neighborhood Commercial area on the very east side of the property at the irrtersection of County Road 42 and Dodd Boulevard. The existing zoning on the property is "A" Agricultural, and it is proposed to rewne to a planned unit developmerrt to allow for a residential project with a small amount of neighborhood Planning Commission Minutes June 4, 1997 Page 3 commercial on the very eastern side. Bodmer noted that at the previous meetings four primary issues remained to be discussed this evening for resolution. The first ofthese has to do with the commercial azea on the east side of the property relative to the design of the gas/convenience center, as well as the rear building elevations ofthe multi-tenant buildings. The second issue has to do with the project design concerning sidewalks and porches on the dwelling units. The third issue has to do with the overall density and greenspace calculations in the attached dwelling unit azea. The fourth and final issue has to do with the Pazk Committee rewmmendation for a public park on the west side of the property, and how a private play area might substitute for tlis. Commissioner Nagler asked about the pathway illustrated on Dodd Boulevard. Bodmer stated that while the development plan shows the pathway in place, it actually does not exist at this time and would have to be installed. Mike Falk approached the podium and introduced himself as one of the members of CWB Development, which is working with Rottlund Homes on this project. Other members of the development team consist of Kathy Anderson from KKE Architects and Richard Palmiter from Rottlund Homes. Falk stated that they have reduced the number of attached units in the villas azea from 122 mots to 116 units. This has resulted in an increase in the amoum of greenspace from 47%to 54.3%. He stated the playscape azea has been added to the very western side of the attached housing units at the curve of the main street ixrtersecting County Road 42. Falk also stated that every other single family detached unit will have a front porch as a minimum. Even those units not having a porch will have a front stoop azea. Falk stated the azchitect has drawn renderings illustrating the reaz of the mufti-tenant commercial buildings, as well as proposed elevations for the convenience grocery and motor fuel sales area, including the canopy over the gas pumps. He displayed a series of overhead transparencies that illustrated other forms of "residential" azchitechue used on commercial buildings in the City of Woodbury near a mixed residential development. Commissioner Edgeton stated she is still somewhat uncleaz on which units would have porches and how that related to the flush garage faces. Falk stated the design emphasis for these units is intended to focus on the front door of the dwellings, rather than on the garage face. All of the detached units would have the garage doors flush with the front of the building, rather than have the garages jut out in front of the dwelling space. He stated at least 50% of the detached single Emily units would have frorrt porches, and that they are guaranteeing these will be spaced so they will occur on an"every other one" spacing. Edgeton asked, in the commercial area, if the city allows motor fuel sales, how many pumps would be located there. Falk stated the current rendering illustrates six pumps. Edgeton stated this seems to be a relatively small nnrr~ber of pumps and asked what the typical number of pumps is at a motor fuel station. Falk stated the industry standazd is now eight or more pumps. Edgeton asked how many pumps aze at the recently consuucted convenience grocery motor fuel stations in Apple Valley. Tom Lovelace stated that Kwik Trip Las between ten and twelve pumps, and the just completed Kicks (Phillips 66) convenience grocery store has eight pumps. Edgeton asked how many were at the SuperAmerica on County Road 42. Community Development Director Rick Kelley said he believes there aze nine pumps at that location. McNamara raised a question about drainage issues. He said with the density being proposed here and the small lots for single family units, he wondered if the size of the storm water holding pond was appropriate. City Engineer Keith Gordon stated the pond size was appropriate, although there might be some fine tuning during the construction design phase to adjust the contour locations in the pond. Planning Commission Minutes June 4, 1997 Page 4 McNamara asked about the difference in the number of units in the narrative of the staff report (284) versus the number listed in the recommendation paragraph (116). Bodmer stated the narrative report indicates how many dwelling units there are in total, including the detached single family, aswell asthe townhome-type units. She stated in the approval of the building pemut, however, only the number of units (116) for the townhomes are listed since the city does not formally review and approve site plan and building permit authorization for detached units. Nagler asked if the landscape plan was okay. Bodmer stated the forester has reviewed it and recommended its approval. Chair Fellarer stated the public hearing on this proposed project had occurred at a previous meeting, but he would be willing to take any audience comments with new information. Leo Tutewohld stated in his opinion the proposed playscape and todot azea would be better off if it could be located in place of the convenience grocery and gas station. Thomas Sharp of the Apple Valley East neighborhood stated he was pleased to see the number of townhome units has been decreased, and asked ifthere was a drawing comparing the previous plan with the plan being presented this evening. He stated the dates listed in the report for the timing of the realignment of Dodd Boulevazd and extension of Diamond Path seem to be too slow. He fek these road improvements should be completed before this project is approved. He stated he had heard in the City of Rosemount the rigbtof- way for Diamond Path had expired, and they had to repurchase it. Bodmer stated both Apple Valley and Rosemount have discussed with the Dakota County Highway Department the extension of Diamond Path and the realigmnent of Dodd Boulevard, since they are county roads. She said she was unclear about any type of expiration of rightof--way easements in the City of Rosemount. Richard Palrniter of Rottlund Homes indicated which six units had been deleted in the latest plan by displaying an overhead transparency wntaining both the former plan and the current proposed plan. He said they evaluated very carefully which dwelling units to eliminate so they could eliminate driveways as well, to increase the greenspace even further. He also said that by eliminating the private roadways simultaneously, they were able to reduce development costs so they can keep the sales price the same for these units, keeping them as affordable housing. Chair Fellmer asked if this revised plan continued to provide for emergency vehiculaz access. Bodmer stated if the driveways into the multi-family areas aze 150 feet or less in distance, they do not need to have an emergency vehicle turnazound area because the fire truck would not have to eater the drive and would simply fight the fire from the main private roadway. She said, however, they have not had a chance to thoroughly review the revised plan. Nagler asked if it would be appropriate for the Commission to act before a thorough review had been completed. Bodmer stated that while staff had not looked at every little detail ofthis revised plan, they are comfortable with the overall plan and the revisions which have been discussed. She said any further modifications would just be fine tuning, and that the biggest objective in terms of increasing the greenspace and reducing hard surfaces has been met. Palrniter stated their engineers know the city's design standards and made the revisions in order to meet the city's criteria. Chair Fellmer asked if there were any other staff issues. Bodmer stated the whole concept of placing some commercial use in this plam~ed development were evaluated by staff against the "NCC" zoning standazds Planning Commission Minutes June 4, 1997 Page 5 that have substantially greater design and performance standards than other commercial zones in the city, and that these standards were intentionally designed to minimi~? impacts on adjacent residential uses. She said it is staffis intent to place these standards within the planned unit development. Nagler asked ifthe site plan and building pemut authorization forthe commercial uses would be subject to fiuther review. Bodmer stated that they would. At the time that the end users aze detenriined, final plans would have to be drawn up and submitted to the city for formal site plan and building permit approval. Edgeton asked if it would be possible to restrict the number of gasoline pumps. Bodmer stated none of the city's current caning districts address this issue, but she believes it could be covered in the specific planned development ordinance. Dougherty affirmed this is possible. Bodmer went onto state that the state's Livable Communities Act indicates that denser development in suburban azeas is necessary to control urban sprawl, and also to promote affordability. This proposed development contains a mixed neighborhood with retail uses within a walkable distance, and contains a mix of housing, both affordable and move-up dwelling units. Chair Felkner asked if the Livable Communities Act also anticipates neighborhood commercial in these types of neighborhoods. Bodmer stated that it did. Chair Fellarer stated he understands that a convenience grocery and gas operation is necessary to serve as a "mini-anchor" in order to make the other neighborhood commercial uses viable, although this does represent somewhat of a deviation from the city's past policies of trying to place all commercial uses in the city's downtown core. Bodmer stated that while this has certainly been the case in the past, the city has done a good job in protecting the downtown core so that it now can stand on its own. Consequently, limited amounts of outlying cot[miercial will not serve to diminish the viability of Apple Valley's downtown. Edgeton stated that when this project was first proposed, she was against having any gasoline sales, but upon review ofthe project and as it has evolved before the Conunission, she feels it is appropriate in conjunction with the other multi-tenant retail buildings. She does believe, however, the number of pumps should be limited to somewhere between two and four in order for it truly to be a local and neighborhood facility as opposed to drawing from a trade area of several miles. McNauara. stated he had similaz sentiments at first, but he is now comfortable with the project. Nagler thanked the developers for their ongoing work to modify the project. Now she feels it has been made into a much better development. , MOTION: Edgeton moved, seconded by McNamara, to recommend approval ofthe comprehensive plan to include an "NC" component. Motion carried 4-0. MOTION: Edgeton moved, seconded by McNamara, to recommend approval of the planned unit development rezoning. Motion carried 4-0. MOTION: Edgeton moved, seconded by McNamara, to recommend approval of a preliminary plat with the conditions recommended by staff. Motion carried 4-0. Planning Commission Minutes June 4,1997 Page 6 MOTION: Edgeton moved, seconded by McNamara, to recommend approval of the site plan and building permit authorization for the 116 multi-family units with concept approval only of the connnercial site plan. Motion carried 4-0. B. Transit Hub Mixed Use Rick Kelley identified this project, which is being proposed by the Apple Valley Economic Development Authority. The property is located on the east side of Cedar Avenue between 155th Street and 157th Street. The property is currently designated on the comprehensive plan map for a combination of neighborhood commercial, limited business, medical, and medium and high density mufti-family. It is proposed to amend the comprehensive plan to allow a certain element of retail business and civic uses, as well as the aforementioned uses. It is also proposed to rezone the property from its existing planned unit development to include wmmercial recreation uses and civic uses to accommodate a movie theater and a transit hub and pazk and ride lot. A prelirniuary plat is included in the project that would reconfigure the existing outlot lines into a series of buildable lots and blocks, and also dedicate anorth-south street between 155th and 157th which would be closer to Cedar Avenue than the existing Garrett Drive. Garrett Drive would then haue its northernmost portion vacated and fumed into a culde-sac. Finally, the site plan and building permit authorization would be considered to allow const<'uction fora 16-scrceu movie theater and a 364 stall pazk and ride lot with a transit station. Two fir[ure sites are indicated on the plan that would come back for further review before the Commission at some future meeting. These include a rental housing site on the very east side of the property and a smaller commercial site north of the movie theater, which could contain either a restaurant or a small multi-tenant retail building. Kelley noted that at the last Planning Commission meeting the issue of traffic generation and its potential impacts on the adjacent properties were discussed. The city has had its traffic consultant, SEH, take a look at the plan and do a comparison between how much traffic would be generated from the proposed project versus how much would be generated under the existing caning on the property. For wmparison purposes, staff took a look at the total amount of lot azea and applied the standard lot coverage ratios for the differing permitted uses. Consequently, staff indicates the existing zoning would allow 25 townhouse units; a 7500 s.f. sit<lown restaurant with liquor; a 17,000 s.f. multi-tenant retail building; a 40,000 s.f. medical office building; and a 100,000 s.f. general office building. The traffic generated from these uses was then compared to how much would be generated from the proposes uses. The traffic report is attached to the packet and generally indicates that the total level of traffic would remain the same, although the peak hour times would shift somewhat. In essence, the park and ride would tend to generate morning peak hour traffic a little bit earlier than the existing uses, prni~arily because people need to arrive at the pazk and ride prior to the time they need to be at work, and the time at which most businesses open. Also, the proposed uses would tend to generate traffic in the evening hours, as well as on the weekends, at a somewhat greater rate than the uses under the currern zoning. However, in all cases the existing roadway network has more than sufficierrt capacity to accommodate this traffic, and that even the worst case scenarios indicate that the peak hour PM traffic that would be generated and duected past the existing residential uses would not be an unusual level. The traffic consultant did note that a second access to 155th Street from the park and ride lot would be necessary. Kelley went onto state that staff also believes that once the proposed project is established, the city would probably need to restrict parking on 155th Street to allow the full width of the road to accommodate traffic. Under the crurem conditions many of the employees of Menards on the north side of 155th Street are encouraged to park along the road, which does resuh in some congestion, which would only be exacerbated by the development of the proposed site. He said it will probably also be necessary to restrict parking on the very westernmost portion of li5th Street at the Cedar Avenue intersection, also to allow fuming movements along the full width of the road rather than having to give up some of it to a parking lane. Planning Commission Minutes June 4, 1997 Page 7 General discussion ensued wncerniug the tra$ic report and where the majoriiy of traffic would be headed, and how much of it would occur different hours ofthe day. Jana Elsbeny of the audience stated she does not believe the traffic report, and thinks these proposed uses will have a significant impact on her and her neighborhood. She said this use is different than what she was told the properly was caned for, and she objects to any change in the caning. Nagler stated the city had requested a traffic analysis be done by an outside expert, and it is their responsibility to evaluate this project on an objective basis. MOTION: McNamara moved, seconded by Edgeton, to recommend approval of the comprehensive plan land use map to include retail business and civic uses. Motion carried 4-0. MOTION: McNamara moved, seconded by Edgeton, to recommend approval of an amendment to planned unit development no. 507 to niclude wmmercial recreation and transit park and ride uses, as well as to reconfigure the subzones to follow the new lot lines. Motion carried 4-0. MOTION: McNamara moved, seconded by Edgeton, to recommend approval of the preliminary plat of Carroll Center 4th Addition. Motion carried 4-0. MOTION: McNamara. moved, seconded by Edgeton, to recommend approval of the site pkm/building permit authorization for the movie theater and transit hub, subject to staff conditions. Motion carried 4-0. Kelley noted that this item would appear on the June 5th City Council meeting. C. Simmons Dental Clinic Assistant Planrrer Tom Lovelace identified the location of this proposed building on the east side of County Road 11, just north of the recerrtly completed Kwik Trip facility on Palomino Drive. Lovekrcz noted that access to this pazcel will be via a common access drive that loops from Palomino Drive from Hunters Way that will serve both the Kwik Trip facility and this lot. It can also serve the remaini g vacant lot located on the comer of Palomino Drive and Hurrters Way. He stated the proposal includes a setback variance to County Road 11, which is being requested due to the `jog" in the right-of--way for County Road 11. He also noted the existing right-of-way for County Road 11 is eartra wide. Dr. Simmons stated he has been a 16-yeaz resident of the city and currently has his dental practice in the Ridges Medical Building. He thinks Iris building is a very good buffer between the Kwik Trip facility located on the south and the new townhouses being constructed on the north. Chair Felkner asked if there would be any problems if County Road 11 would be widened, and we have approved a setback variance. Lovelace stated that would not create any problem. In fact, a 15-foot wide strip ofright-of--way for County Road 11 is expected to be given back to the adjacent property owners. Commissioner Nagler asked if the 2 1/2% kurdscape requirement has been verified yet. Lovelace stated it has not yet been verified, but this typically occurs at the time a bid is actually received for installation of the landscape material. He did state, however, that the forester had some suggestions regazding some of the species indicated on the landscape plan. Planning Commission Minutes June 4,1997 Page 8 Dr. Simmons stated he understands the forester would like to see more plant variety, and also has indicated some of the species adjacent to the parking lot do not have a history of standing up to snow removal operations or have a low tolerance for salt. He stated he would be more than happy to modify to whatever the forester believes is appropriate. Lovelace stated the very eastern side of the pazking area is missing concrete curb. The city's ordinance does require concrete curbing azound the perimeter of all pazking lots. Commissioner McNamara referred to the staff report where it talked about the possible shifting ofthe building to eliminate or reduce the requested setback variance. Lovelace stated that in his analysis, he noted the north-south drive accessing the pazking lot is 30 feet in width, and it could easily be reduced to a 24-foot width which would allow the building to shift that six feet easterly. He said this was intended pritnarity to be for informational use in the Commission's evaluation of the request, and that staff is not suggesting the driveway be narrowed. Dr. Simmons stated he would prefer to have the driveway wider. Commissioner Edgeton said she believes the pazking aisle should also be kept at the full width. MOTION: Edgeton moved, seconded by McNamara, to recommend approval of the setback variances in accordance with the staff report. Motion carried 4-0. MOTION: Fdgeton moved, seconded by McNamara, to recommend approval of the setback site plan and building pemut authorization for the Simmons dental clinic. Motion carried 4-0. Rick Kelley noted this item would appear tomorrow evening on the June 5th City Council agenda. DISCUSSION ITEMS - None- 8. OTHER BUSINESS A. Chair Fellmer stated that he wished to make an announcement to the Commission and passed out copies of a letter he had written to Mayor Humphrey. Chair Fellmer then read the letter which serves to tender his resignation from the Commission, outlined the development highlights which have occurred over the past several years, and thanked members of the Commission and staff for their efforts. Fellmer said he would intend to serve out the rest of the month of June. 9. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: McNamara moved, seconded by Nagler, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 4-0. Meeting adjourned at 837 p.m.