Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/17/1999CITY OF APPLE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES February 17,1999 1. CALL TO ORDER The City of Apple Valley Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chair Edgeton aY 7:00 pm. Members Present: Karen Edgeton, Tom Mehmder, Ice McNamara, Frank Blundetto, Tim Burke, Diane Nagler. Members Absent: None. Staff Present: Assistant Pkmner Tom Lovelace, Community Development Director Rick Kelley, Nelda Werkmeister, Consulting Engineer Keith Gordon, Attorney Sharon Ilills. Others Present: See sign-in sheet. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Burke moved, seconded by Nagler, to approve the agenda. The motion carried 6-0. 3. APPROVAL OF FEBRUARY 3,1999, MINUTES MOTION: Burke moved, seconded by Mekmder, to approve the minutes as submitted. The motion carried 5-0 (1 abstention Nagler). 4. CONSENT ITEMS -None - 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Revised Preliminary Plat, Setback Variances & Site Plan/Building Permit Authorization for 16 New (plus 4 existing) Townhome Dwellings in a Twinhome Configuration -Palomino Cliffs 2 Chair Edgeton opened the public hearing at 7:02 p.m. with the standard remarks. Tom Lovelace introduced the item. He noted that the four units ofthe existing building are in varying stages of completion. Edgeton asked ifhe could point out the variances being requested. Lovekuz did so, and went onto say he thought staff could work with the developer to eliminate all but about two of the variances. The turnaround in proximity to the existing building and the distance between two ofthe buildings would still require variances. Nagler asked for an explanation of the wetland issues. Lovelace responded that the retaining wall is within the 15-foot wetland buffer zone. Dick Curry, representing the petitioner SVK, stated that the curtin$ of the buildings creates the need for variances. Straightening the units would result in neighbors being able to look into each other's side windows. Curry thought stucco achieves the intent ofthe Apple Valley ordinance. Blundetto asked if the driveways would work if the units were straightened. Curry responded that they may bane to put driveways in the front if the units were straightened. Planning Commission Minutes February 17,1999 Page 2 Berke asked how close the units were to the wetland buffer, wondering if they could be moved back. Sarah Moore with Landfonn Engineering, working with the petitioner, said they want to minimi~r grading issues. She noted the retahring wall could be moved outside the wetland buffer. McNamara asked about specific slopes. Moore stated there were 2.5:1 slopes shown on the plan. Erosion protection measures would include fiber blankets, as well as importing less sandy soil. 1'sdgeton asked if the units could be moved back while preserving the canting. Curry of SVK said it was possible to shift the whole building. Nagler asked about landscaping. Moore stated the landscape plan was based on the original plan approved for RCS. She went on to say the petitioner is willing to incorporate a larger variety of species and will work with staff. She also described the fiber blanket. Edgeton asked if there was a plan to restore some ofthe damage to the wetland. Moore replied they need to excavate some ofthe sediment, and they are working with the DNRto determine the best management plan. She went onto explain that there are no plans to alter the wetland or change the grade, but simply to excavate some ofthe sedimem. Nagler asked about screening along County Road # 11. Lovelace responded that the wetland is to remain undisturbed; elevations on the site itself provide some bu$~eriug; and sight ]roes for traffic should be verified before trees are planted along the County Road #11 side. McNamara asked about the city's position on stucco versus brick. Lovelace said stucco is not specified in the ordinance, but that it is a sturdy finish. The other issue to consider, Lovelace stated, is fairness. Edgeton felt the interrt oftbe ordinance was to require long-lasting, easy to ma;Trta;n materials. She werrt onto say she didn't remember anyone coming in and wanting stucco, but rasher that the exception requests usually involved siding. She doesn't want to force brick if it is not azchitecturally suitable, and she said she didn`t have a problem with stucco if it is just as durable. Lovelace stated staff would like to see that the finish color is integral. He also said the grades may be helped by lowering the basements a couple feet. Moore responded she wasn4 sure of any benefits by doing that because that would make some building pads steeper and some flatter. Consulting Engineer Keith Gordon said the grades can work, but it will require some massaging. Don Weatherford of 13269 Huntington Terrace shared three concerns: (1) what happens if they developer can't do what they say they think they can; (2) traffic at Palomino and County Road # 11; (3) concerned whether stucco finish would mirror the image of the neighborhood. Bill Nichols of 13271 Huntington Terrace said Rodeo Hills is the only neighbor affected by this project. He expressed concern about the level ofthe pond if there were heavy raiu611s; that the retaining wall be constructed to last 50 years; and whether the turnaround is adequate for Fire I)epartruer>t vehicles. Gene Smith of 13348 Huntington Drive said he is still concerned about the steep grades. He went onto say the white concrete stoner aining wall doesn4 &t imo the neighborhood, and that everything around the azea is brick. He asked how large the proposed units are and their targeted population; whether there were any three-car garages and whether an association is proposed. Lowell Kegley of 13341 Huntington Drive asked that the Commission consider the appearance of the 4-unit building with the rest of the units. He asked ifthe driveways would be concrete or asphalt. Planning Commission Minutes February 17,1999 Page 3 Melander expressed concern about the grading and erosion control if a rainfall occurs. Curry responded they use the right seed mix and aclay/dirt topsoil. He went onto say excavating is their business and they only want to do it once. There being no other comments, Edgeton closed the public hearing at 8:00 p.m B. Preliminary Plat to Create 8 Light Industrial Lots, Master Development Plan, and Generic Site Plan/Building Permit Authorization for Office/Warehouse Building at Pilot Knob and 147th Street -Valley Park Business Center Chair Edgeton opened the public hearing at 8:02 p.m. Community Development Director Rick Kelley introduced the item. He noted the parking lots exczed the minimum requirements in anticipation of lazge numbers of employees. Steve Schottler, Manager of Development for Wispazk Corporation, gave a brief company history and an overview of the infomraation packet. provided to the Pl~ng Commission. He noted that 147th Street will be an important factor to this business pazk. Buildings 1, 2 and 3 will be built pretty much as shown, with construction to begin this spring. Ed Farr, architect for the project, pointed out that the buildings will shield buck movement and noise, with all buildings facing the streets. They are designed with a muhi-colored soft-tech feel. He went on to say the landscape plan excceds the minimum standards,. and the building wverage is 22%. hi response to Edgeton's question about signage, Fazr stated they anticipate predesigned tenant panel signs on the building. There will also be at least one ground sign neaz Energy Way and Pilot Knob announcing the park; and directional signs will be important. Burke asked if the proposed soccer use would alter the pazking requirements. Kelley said with cross easements and shared driveways, parking is adequate. Kelley added that the incorporation of the Melby landscaping business into the plat is anticipated in the future. John Scha~ausen of County Road 42 posed several questions: (1) Are there restrictions on how close Building 8 can be to his property? (2) Height restrictions? (3) Will the tree line separating the two properties be preserved? He stated he would like to seethe trees kept intact. Rick Nelson of 14583 Europa Way recommended a 4-way stop at 147th Street and Pilot Knob. He said he hoped bermiug was adequate along 147th to shield headlights from shining in the residential azea. He asked if a height variance is needed for Building 3, given its proximity to residential. He wanted clarification oftbe truck court, expressing concern about excessive exhaust in the winter and wondering what the recourse is for residents. Finally, he queried whether semi traffic would stay on the east end. There being no other conuuents from the public, the hearing was closed at 8:35 p.m. 6. LAND USE/ACTION ITEMS -None - 7. OTHER BUSINESS A. Receive Information on Setbacks. to Condemned Right-of--Way (147th Street) Kelley noted this was strictly an informational item to explain why a variance request had been on earlier agendas and since has been deemed unnecessary by the city attorney's office. Planning Commission Minutes February 17,1999 Page 4 8. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Melander moved, seconded by Nagler, to adjourn the meetiug at 8:38 p.m. Motion carried 6-0.