The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About11/14/2001110.1111ll1K liVllll111JJ1V111V1111U1GJ 11-1Y-LVV1 1 ZIYVG 1 Vl J CITY OF APPLE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES NOVEMBER 14, 2001 1. CALL TO ORDER The City of Apple Valley Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chair Karen Edgeton at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Tim Burke, David Schindler, Karen Edgeton, Tom Melander (arrived at 7:09), Jeannine Churchill, Jim Hadley Members Absent: John Betgman Staff Present: City Engineer Keith Gordon; City Attorney Sharon Hills, Assistant Planner Kathy Bodmer, Assistant Planner Margaret Milton Dykes, Community Development Director Rick Kelley, City Planner Tom Lovelace 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Burke moved, seconded by Churohill, to approve the agenda with item 6B being moved to the consent agenda as item 4B. The motion carried 5-0. 3. APPROVAL OF OCTOBER 17, 2001 MINUTES MOTION: Hadley moved, seconded by Churchill, to approve the minutes as presented. The moton carried 5-0. 4. CONSENT ITEMS A. Side Yard Setback Variance for House Addition at 13257 Findlay Court B. Rear Yard Setback Variance for House Addition at 7291 Upper 136t° Street MOTION: Burke moved, seconded by Churchill, to recommend approval of the consent agenda. Motion carried 5-0. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Amend Fence Performance Standards Chair Edgeton opened the public hearing at 7:04 p.m. with the standard remarks. Assistant Planner Kathy Bodmer introduced the item as noted in the city attorney's memo. The amendment to the performance standards would clarify acceptable construction materials and maintenance standards. There being no other comments, Edgeton closed the public hearing at 7:06 p.m. MOTION: Hadley moved, seconded by Burke, to recommend approval of the fence regulations ordinance amendment. Motion carried 5-0. 6. LAND USE/ACTION ITEMS http://www.ci.apple-valley.mn.us/Minutes/planning_commission/2001/1 1 1 40 1m.htm 3/17/2009 y aauaaa uF, vvuaauau~yvu iyyuyu~~.~ a y-y-r-c.vvi 10.~'V L Vl J A. Condifional Use Permit for Outdoor Display Assistant Planner Margaret Milton Dykes explained the request Commissioner Melander arrived at 7:09 p.m. Churchill expressed concern with using the west side as a display area, even if it is fenced. She stated there might be problems if the roadway is not cleazly designated as one way and signed for pickup and drop-off. The Commission discussed details of the proposed fencing and gate, as well as merchandise. to be displayed. Gordy Schmitz of Greystone Construction, representing the petitioner, explained that they went with a solid fence as a compromise and have created an internal access to the sales floor from the west side. Schmitz stated his understanding that if storage occurred, a roof structure would be needed. If there is a problem with temporary storage of repaired items, the petitioner agrees to display only new and used items for sale in the proposed display area. Melander asked about air circulafion where engines are being started. Schmitz replied that a new exhaust system was put in the repair area to address that concern. Hadley clarified that wrought iron fencing of the west side display area would be acceptable if only items for sale were displayed there. Comments by Edgeton and Churchill reflected the importance of something that would lend itself to oleaz view by the city's code enforcement personnel. - MOTION: Churchill moved, seconded by Hadley, to recommend approval of a conditional use permit for two outdoor display azeas as shown on the submitted site plan for Ace Hazdwaze with the following conditions: (a) finished retail merchandise only shall be displayed in the fenced-in outdoor display areas, except where permitted by special outdoor display permit, such as sidewalk sales. All retail merchandise shall be neatly arranged within the display areas, and any shelves used to display merchandise shall be constructed in an attractive, workman-like manner; (b) the outdoor display areas specifically shall not be used for storage of items left for repair or pickup; (c) fence material for display azeas shall be wrought iron or a similaz maintenance-free material; (d) traffic flow shall be cleazly marked around the building as one way. Motion tamed 6-0. B. Site Plan/Building Permit Authorization for Ruby Tuesday Restaurant at Pincher Market Place City Planner Tom Lovelace introduced the item. He reviewed the overall site plan that was originally approved and noted this request includes slight modifications to the site plan and building elevations. Edgeton asked if the small plaza for Restaurants C and D is being sacrificed to make this change. Lovelace answered that the plaza still exists but in a different configuration. Lovelace went on to mention possible enhancements to the building. _ Chuck Freiberg of RSP Architects, the pefifioner, stated their wIllingness to work with staff to £malize the building enhancements. He noted that a column was missing on the elevations that were submitted. MOTION: Melander moved, seconded by Churchill, to recommend approval of the site plan building permit authorization to allow for constmcfion of a 4,929 s.f. Restaurant on Outlot D of Fischer Mazket Place, subject to the following two conditions: (1) approval shall be contingent upon the approval and recording of the Fischer mazket Place 7a' Addifion final plat; and (2) additional azchitectuml enhancements shall be incorporated into the east and south elevations of the building to the satisfaction of City staff. Motion carried 6-0. 7. OTHER BUSINESS A. Small Area Plan for Vacant Property at Galaxie Avenue and 153''d Street Lovelace spoke of the location and goals of the Small Area Plan. http://www.ci.apple-valley.mn.us/Minutes/planning_commission/2001/111401m.htm 3/17/2009 Melander asked about the limits of the city's authority, and whether the landowner was on boazd with the concept. Lovelace replied that the landlord is a participant. B. Legacy of Apple Valley Lovelace introduced the item. Burke asked why this was being looked at while the Small Area Plan is pending, since it falls within that area. Lovelace explained that an Environmental Assessment W orksheet is required and will take some time: Regazdless of the timing issues, any proposal would have to incorporate the standards adopted through the Small Area Plan and succeeding ordinances. Bill Griffith of Hartford Development introduced himself and other members of his team. He stated his belief that planning for this site can run concurrently with the Small Area Plan. Griffith pointed out the pedestrian walkways and water features. Greenspace is significant because of the incorporation of underground pazking. He went on to say that receiving goods in the commercial area offers a design challenge, but that smaller trucks with more frequent deliveries are becoming more common. Griffith described the residential components also. Senior housing with common amenities is included, as well as rental spaces of both apartments and two-story townhouse style units. Executive office suites are included in the townhouse style rental units as well. Approximately 20% of rental units would be set aside for key worker housing: Hartford has talked to the Dakota County Community Development Agency and the Economic Development Authority, and would request tax increment fmancing. Concerns expressed by the Commission included: long rows ofowner-occupied townhomes; retail elevations don't reflect potential of second-story residential or office; retail design doesn't seem to match the residential architecture. Elizabeth. Kautz of Hartford explained that a series of rectangles provides the best utilization of land, and that traffic was considered in designing the dead-end streets and access points to both the residential and commercial sectors of the development. Griffith noted that the evolution of the commercial buildings would depend on the retail partners. C. Hawthorne Greenes Bodmer described the concept proposed. She noted that most of the fne calls are garage or vehicle fires, according to the Apple Valley Fire Department, so alley access to the garages must meet with the Fire Marshal's approval. Larry Frank of Arcon Development stated that Arcon would function as site manager, while Ryland would serve as builder and developer. Chris Enger with Ryland described the proposed new urban village concept as a walking community oriented towazd front doors. The single-family homes aze 22 feet wide. Six neighborhoods are identified, being careful to limit the number of units in the townhome buildings. Enger went onto say that every home has a sidewalk in front of it. Concerns and questions'offered bythe Planning Commission included: looks too busy and too congested; community azea not centrally located; parking on one side of the street may be inadequate; whether enough room for snow storage; dead- end alleys; need more diversity of housing designs with such a lazge number of units; not enough greenspace and yard space for children to play; would welcome another housing type; like the combination of single family and townhomes. 8. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Melander moved, seconded by Churchill, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 6-0. The meeting was adjourned at 10:02 p.m. http://www.ci.apple-valley.mn.us/Minutes/planning_commission/2001/111401m.htm 3/17/2009