The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About08/01/2001r raaaruu~ c,vuuur~~iuu sviuautc~ o-J-~.vvJ CTTY OF APPLE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 1, 2001 1. CALL TO ORDER rage 1 vi ~ The City of Apple Valley Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chair Karen Edgeton at 7:00 p.m. Members Present Jahn Berg<van, Jeannine Churchill, David Schindley Raren Edgetoq Tim Burke, Tam Melander Members Absent Jim Hadley Staff Present: Consulting Engineer Kcith Gordon, Ciry ACmrney Bob Bauer, Assistant Planner Kathy Bodmer, Assistant Player MargazeC Milton, Ciry Plannai Tom Lovelace, Community Develbpment Director Rick Kelley - 2.APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Churchill moved, seconded by Bergman, to approve [he agenda The motion carried 6-0. 3. APPROVAL OF NLY 18, 2001 MINUTES MOTTON: Churchill moved, seconded by Bergman, to approve the minutes as presented. The motion carried 4-0 (2 abstentious-Melander, Burke). 4. CONSENT ITEMS -None - 5. PUBLIC HEARIlVGS A. Planned Development Amendment [o RestauranUPlaza Cluster PD #646 Chair EdgeWn opened the public hearing at 7:03 p.m. with the standazd remazks. City Planner Tom Lovelace introduced the item. He distributed a letter in which the petitoner requested that the public hearing be opened and continued to Iha naxt Planning Commission meefing to allow their "architect to prepare an even more creative and exciting plaza area." MOTION: Burke moved, seconded by Melander, [o continue the public hearing to the next Planning Commission meeting. Motion carved 6-0. 6. LAND USE/ACTION TTEMS A. Amendment to PD #144, Zone 5, to Add Veterinary Clinics to Permitted Neighborhood Commercial Uses; Site P1anBuilding Permit Authorization for an 11,000 s.f. Multi-tenant Commercial Building Assistant Planner Kathy Bodmer inHOduced the project She stated that Traffic Consultant Glen Van Wormer reviewed the revised grading plan after the meeting paokets were diahibu[ed to the Planning Commission. Tn his omI commevts to Bodmer he noted that the wades were revised so that parking areas have slopes [hat do not exceed 5°O/a, but he still expressed concerns. Van Wormer outlined four criteria that, if me[, would resolve the gading issues. There was same discussion about the initial site plan compazed [o the torrent site plan Dr. Ron Hunt, the petitioner, explained the urgency oFthe project and his desire for professional tenants. RolfLokenagard, the azchitect for the project, indicated that the plans could be modified to meet Mr. Van Womer's cd[eria He asked For the Planning Commission's approval wntingent on that condition. Bodmer stated that the slopes within the parking lot was the only outstanding issue, and that she is comfortable with recommending approval with the wndition that the parking lot design has to meet Van Wormer's fom criteria. Bodmer also noted that by conducting a telephone survey she found only one community in the area that has design standazds for slopes in parking lots. Burke said he liked thetwo-story design with the single story facing east MOTTON: Churchill moved, seconded by Burke, to recommend approval of the request to amend PDd44, Zone 5 to allow a veterinarian clinic http://www.ci.apple-valley.mn.us/Minutes/planning_commission/2001 /080101 M.html 3/17/2009 rlannfng wmmfssfon fvilnufes a-I-~vul rage ~ of 3 as a permitted use in the zoning district with the condifion that outdoor kennels or pens are strictly prolnbited. Motion carried 6-0. MOTTON: Churchill moved, seconded by Burke, to recommend approval ofthe site plan and give building permit authorization to constmct a 12,000. square foot office building with the. following conditions: 1 . the parking lot design shall be modified as recommended by the City's Traffic Engineer [o ensure safe ctrculafion within the site: (i) radii within the site shall be minimum of 10 feet; (ii) maximum side elopes in the pazking azea shall not exceed 5%; (iir~ driving lanes shall not exceed elopes of 8%; (iv) that the driveway on the north side and [he dumpster shall be moved to the west; 2. the slopes on the south side ofthe site shall be modified [o not exceed 3:1 3. a landscape bid shall be submitted at the time of building permit issuance that verifies that the valve of the Lmdscape plantings meet or exceed 2 1/2%ofthe value ofthe construction ofthe building based on Means Coustmction Data; 4, dre site plan and building design submitted for City Council approval be substantially as presented here. Motion carried 6-0. B. Beacons on the Park -Comprehensive Plan Amendment (MD to LD), Rezoning (A1-SA to R-3) and Preliminary Plat for 25 Single Family Lots Assistant Planner Mazgaret Milton described the request. She noted that the previous grading plan showed an 84-86% loss of trees, while the revised plan results in a 70J4%u loss oftrees. Milton reviewed public hearing wmments and staffs response. Staffs main concern is loss of trees. Melander stated that if something is going to be done, it seems we aze going to suffer tree loss. Edgeton said drat it is difficuh to compare this plan to [he multi-fmnily plans the Commission saw because a detailed grading plan ie only available for the current proposal. ' Ed Hasek of Westwood Professional Services, represenfing the petitioner, spoke ofthe number of trees on particular lots: about 20 trees on Lot 1, 1-3 on Lott, and S or 6 bees on Lot 6. - Melander queried whether it would be possible to save the trees on Lot 6 if a variance were grouted to allow the house [o be positioned closer to the street Hasek thought so if [he gazage were on the left side. Kurt Manley of Manley Development slated that the highest ]and use value would be apartments, but that all the neighbors he has talked to want single family. He acknowledged there will be significant grading and free loss, and the mare trees saved the better. Manley went on to say that the Evetmoor project has more sigoificant retaining walls than aze proposed here. He concluded by pointing out there was significant tree loss within one of their projects in Eagaq but there were more tree inches when the project was completed. Melander said [trot if Lots I and 2 were combined, a restriction on Lot 6 relative to pad size to save as many trees as possible were imposed, and a heroic effort made for erosion wntrol and runoff, then be would vote for the project. Churchill indicated she was going that direction, too, and that such a project has the best Img-range potential to fit into fhe community. Burke and Bergman concurred. Kurt Manley stated that he was willing to lose one lot by combining Lots 1 and 2. Schindler acknowledged neighbors' concerns about runoff' during grading, and said he would want to see a comprehensive plan for erosion control. Milton stated preserving more trees would address most of staffs issues. She did point out that sidewalks aze needed, as well as a nail along County Road #38. Hasek suggested a front setback of20-25 feet on Lots 5 and 6 may result in saving additional trees. MOTION: Melander mound, serquded by Churchill, to recommend approval ofthe Comprehensive Plan redesignanon from "MD" to "LD". - Motion carried 6-0. MOTION: Melander moved, seconded by Churchill, [o rewmmend approval of a rezoning ofthe subject parcel from "M-6A" to "R-3". Morton carried 6-0. MOTION: Melander moved, seconded by Churchill, to recommend approval of a preliminary plat subdividing the subject 12.1 acre property into 24 (by combining hots 1 and 2) single family lots of at least 11,000 squaze feet, with the following conditions: (a) installation of sidewalks; (b) installaton of a bituminous trail along County Road #38; (c) an enhanced erosion control plan be submitted for approval in conjunction with the application for Natural Resources Management Permit; (d) remove the outlot designation of the s[onnwater ponds and dedicate them as drainage http://www.ci.apple-valley.mn.us/Minutes/plamling_commission/2001 /080101M.htm1 3/17/2009 rrntuurry ~,Dltuul~~iuu rviufufes a-L-~wI Yage 3 oY 3 and uNity easements. Motion carried 6-0. MOTTON: Melander moved, seconded by Churchill, to recommend approval of a variance reducing the street right-of--way width from the required 60 feet to 50 feet and street pavement width from 34 feet to 30 feet, upon the condition parking be signed for one side of the street. Motion caried 6-0. MOTTON: Melander moved, seconded by Churchill, to recommend approval of front setback vaziances up to 10 feet on Lots 5 and 6, to be granted only if trees aze saved as a result. Motion carried 6-0. 7.OTHER BUSINESS A. Sketch Plan for Cobblestone Lake Development on the Northeast Corner of C.R #46 & Pilot Knob Road by TraHifion Development City Planner Tom Lovelace descdbod the sketch plan and identified areas of gmva] mining and processing currently on the site. He noted that [he public hearing for this project would be on August 15~. Rob Wachholz with Tradition Development elaborated on the proposal Ae stated that legal agreements allow mining on the site unffi 2008, aldrough at the current pace iY will end ranch sooner The lake and surrounding parkland will belong to the City. Because of tha uniqueness of the proposed parkland, an association would help maintain the park, and the cost to improve the pazk would be subsidized by the City with an amount the City would normally spend to serve the same cumber of households. Wachholz pointed out that they are asking far flexibility in setbacks. Fdgeton asked how the developer would address the grovel mining issues with potential homebuyers. Wachholz answered that the gravel mining and asphalt plant will be visible in the area, although screening will be dons adjacenf [o the proposed single family phase. Association documents will include a summary disclosure, so prospects will also know ofplans £orhigh-density residenfial, etc. Bergman wondered about the time frame for gravel mining south of 160d' Sheet. Wachholz said tha[ mining there is completed, and only processing is taking place. Melander asked about the depth of the pond, which will be more than 25 fee[. Wachholz indicated the lake is pare of the stone water system, and will be partly controlled by storm water management and ground water. Edgeton stated she would hke to see the developer work with azchitects to incorporate front porches. She said she did t have a problem with small commercial buildings with zero setbacks. _ Burke commented that lakefront use for the public is great Melander though[ it a neat plan and well thought out Churchill said something missing in our wmmunity aze mwnhomes for seniors looking for single level living. Schindler stated his only ooncem is the cost of the pazk maintenance: Because the pazk is in one comer of the city, everyone won'[ use it but everyone will pey, based ou dre Associatiom/Pazk Deparhnen[ arrangement. Wachholz pointed out that the City would pay the same basis as for other pazks. The people in the Association would potentially use the parkland the most, and they would also be paying [he most. B. Discussion oP Stgn Ordinance Regarding Menu Boards Assistant Planner Milton introduced tho item, noting tha maximum size menu boazd cmrendy allowed is 32 square feet. The consensus of the Commission was that 32 squaze feet is adequate. Restaurants in violation of that should be notiSed and directed to comply with the current regulations. It was recommended thatmenm boazds be included with any future sigo permit review. B. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Broke moved, seconded by Churchill, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 6-0. The meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m http://www.ci.apple-valley.mn.us/Minutes/planning_Commission/2001 /080101M.htm1 3/17/2009