HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/15/2002CITY OF APPLE VALLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MAY 15, 2002
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: Karen Edgeton, Tom Melander, Jeannine Churchill, John Bergman,
David Schindler, Jim Hadley, and Tim Burke
Members Absent: None
Staff Present: City Engineer Keith Gordon, City Attorney Sharon Hills, Community
Development Director Rick Kelley, City Planner Tom Lovelace, Assistant Planner Kathy
Bodmer, and Assistant Planner Mazgazet Milton Dykes
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Edgeton asked if there were any changes to the agenda. There being none, she called for
its approval.
MOTION: Hadley moved, seconded by Bergman to approve the agenda. The motion
carried 7-0.
3. APPROVAL OF MINiJTES OF MAY 1, 2002
Chair Edgeton asked if there were any changes to the minutes. There being none, she
called for its approval.
MOTIONr Hadley moved, seconded by Churchill, to approve the minutes as presented.
The motion carried 7-0.
4. ' CONSENT ITEMS -None.
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. The Legacy of Apple Valley Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning,
and Preliminary Plat
Assistant Planner Maggie Milton Dykes presented the request from The Hartford
Group for a Comprehensive Plan amendment, rezoning, and a preliminary plat.
Ms. Dykes reported that The Hartford Group requesting the Comprehensive Plan
Amendment, a rezoning and preliminary plat approval in order to subdivide a
27.43 site into 11 lots and two (2) outlots for amixed-use development. The site
is generally located southeast of the intersection of Galaxie Avenue and i53~
Street. The site is part of the Galaxie Avenue/153'a Street Small Area Plan,
which encompasses approximately 65 acres of undeveloped land located between
County Road 42 and 155x' Street West and between Garrett and Foilage Avenues.
Dykes reported that an Environrental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) was
completed for this development and the City Council determined that an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was not necessary. The site is presently
guided in the Comprehensive Guide Plan as "C" (Commercial). The petifioner is
requesting a redesignation to "MIX" (Mixed Use). The site is currently zoned
"GB" (General Business) and "P" (Insfitutional). The applicant is requesting a
zoning change to "PD" (Planned Development). Dykes reported that the site
does meet the area requirements for a planned development district.
Dykes stated that the subject parcel is 27.93 acres, minus the right-of--way and
ponding easements , making a net azea of 23.85 acres. The Haztford goup is
proposing to divide the area into 11 Lots and 2 outlots. Lots 1 and 3 will be used
for apartment buildings, lot 2 for townhouses, and lots 4-10 for commercial
buildings, and Lot 11 will be used for a pazking lot.
Dykes reported that Planning staff remains concerned about pazking. Parking
seems to be on the low end but staff are looking to see if it fits the area. If not,
some of the buildings will have to be downsized in order to accommodate
parking. Edgeton questioned what formula is used in determining parking.
Dykes stated that the formula used for parking is 2.5 spaces per unit for
residential uses. Dykes indicated that she felt the space allowed for 3 restaurants
(24,000 sq. ft.) might be on the high side and that if space is not used, it could be
freed up for parking. Dykes also indicated that she is checking with other areas
with similar developments to see what their parking allowance is. Commissioner
Churchill asked if parking is an issue as a whole or are there certain areas that
specifically raise concerns. Dykes indicated that staff aze most concerned about
parking for the 311 apartment units, and the commercial retail space of 37,650
sq. ft. All other aeeas seem to be within staff s recommendations. Members of
the Commission questioned why there aren't two levels of underground pazking
vs. one, in order to accommodate more pazking. Dykes stated there is a water
table issue and therefore, only one level of underground pazking is feasible.
The petitioner, Bill Griffith, from the Hartford group, addressed the Commission
regazding some of their concems. He indicated that in regard to parking, he feels
that 2.5 spaces/unit is high and that most communities use 2 spaces for residential
uses. He also feels that for the senior development, one space/unit can be used.
Tn addifion a 25-35% efficiency factor for shared use can be put in the formula.
He indicated that if necessary, after doing further analysis on the parking, the
project could be downsized, rather than squeezing more pazking into the project.
Griffith then commented on some of the major improvements of the
development, including, but not limited to the one-way coupler that improves the
function of the streets, the water feature elongated and moved to the north to
allow green space and view sheds, walkable space, and the townhomes
redesigned to meet MSA Road Standards.
Dykes indicated there is also a retaining wall along the pond in the development
and Cornmissioners questioned wtio will pay for the maintenance of the waii.
Dykes indicated that if the wall is within an easement, the City pays for the
maintenance. If not in an easement, the wall could be maintained as a special
service district and maintained through shared costs from users in the
development, on a panty basis.
Dykes reported that a public hearing was opened for this item on February 2Q
2002, during which no comments from the public were received. Dykes. is
recommending that the Commission receive any additional comments tonight
and close the public hearing. If no adverse comments are received, Dykes is
recommending the Commission approve staffls recommendafions as outlined in
her report.
Edgeton opened the public hearing with the standard remarks. No comments
were received from the public.
MOTION: Churchill moved, seconded by Hadley, to recommend approval of a
Comprehensive Plan amendment redesignating the subject site from "C"
(Commercial) to "MIX" (Mixed Use). The motion passed unanimously 7-0.
MOTION: Churchill moved, seconded by Hadley, to approve the rezoning of the
subject site from "GB-1" (General Business) and "P" (Institutional) to "PD"
(Planned Development), subject to a completion of a parking analysis that
satisfies City staff and the ordinance requirements. The mofion passed
unanimously 7-0.
MOTION: Churchill moved, Hadley seconded, to recommend approval of the
preliminary plat subdividing the subject site into 101ots and 2 outlots subject to
approval of the comprehensive plan amendment and rezoning, with the following
conditions:
a. 153`s Street West must be dedicated as a one-way coupler system
as required by the 153'a StreeUGalaxie Avenue Small Area Plan.
b. Trailways and sidewalks that comply with City standards must
be constructed on the 153' Street W. coupler system, Galaxie
Avenue, Foilage Avenue, and on internal streets as required;
c. No building construction may begin until the City approves Site
Plan Review/Building Pexrnit Authorization for each structure in
a particular phase.
d. No grading may commence until the City authorizes a Natural
Resources Management Permit.
e. Engineering designs and calculations must be completed to
ensure that complete infiltration of a 0.5-inch rainfall event will
occur over the project site in aggregate.
f. Merge pond lot (Lot 11) with a lot containing a building.
The motion passed unanimously 7-0.
B. ABRA Auto Body -Conditional Use Permit for Outdoor Storage and Site
Plan/Building Permit Authorization
Maggie Dykes, Assistant Piarrier, presented the request from ABRA Auto Body
for a conditional use permit for outdoor storage of vehicles and site plan building
permit authorization. Dykes reported that ABRA wishes to construct a 17,700
sq. ft. building for auto repair and accessory installaton at the southwest corner
of 151x` Street and Galaxie Avenue. The property is zoned "PD-254", which
allows for commercial uses similaz to those found in the "General Business"
zone. Auto accessories sales and installation, and auto body shops aze pemutted
uses. Outdoor storage, display, and sales are conditional uses.
Dykes reported that the site plan shows a 17,700 sq. ft. building to be used for
auto repair and auto glass installation. The building and pazking lot meet the
required setbacks. The plan shows 88 parking spaces. City code requires 45
spaces. The trash enclosure appears to be the same materials as the building.
Dykes reported that a major concern is the rock-face block materials for the
building, along with the seamed mansard metal roof. It is unclear if the block is
internally pigmented, as required by code. This needs to be addressed before the
Commission recommends approval of a building pemut authorizafion. The
Natural Resources Coordinator for the City has reviewed the landscape plan and
has issues with the number and types of shade trees. The landscape plan also
does not meet the 2.5% cost of the entire plan.
Gary Humphrey, the broker representing ABRA, showed the Commission
pictures of the present site. He then introduced Ron Fiscus and Andy Cody,
representatives from ABRA. Fiscus addressed concerns from the Commission.
He presented pictures of the building and discussed the building materials. He
also had samples of the building materials. Edgeton questioned the colors of the
materials. The purpose of using two colors is to break up the colors somewhat
and the colors proposed look almost the same. Edgeton also would like to see
more relief in the elevation on all sides of the building, and in particular on the
south and east side since it will be facing the street and a residential azea.
ABRA is also proposing to install a fenced area for storage of cars.
Commissioner Melander questioned why cars need to be stored and why does the
storage azea have to be screened. Fiscus explained, for example, when a bad
snowstorm occurs and there are a lot of accidents, there is an overload of cars
waiting to be fixed. Due to the overload, there may be cazs left there longer than
their average 2-3 day stay and need to be secured for vandalism, etc.
After reviewing pictures and a lengthy discussion of the proposed building,
Fiscus then showed a picture of a new building design that ABRA recently
developed up with. This building design is totally different from the building the
Commission reviewed eazlier in the meeting.
After reviewing pictures of the new building design, members of the Commission
still had concerns about the elevation on the south, east and west sides of the
building. They felt there needs to be some significant treatments to the building.
Commissioner Bergman asked planning staff if the 2.5% natural resources
requirement was for plant material only. Dykes responded that yes, it is for plant
material only. Edgeton had questions about the fence and if the code requires
that outdoor storage be screened in with similar materials Edgeton would like
Piaru~liig Staff to look at t1-.e ordinance and see if it relates to this particular
project. Dykes stated she will look into the ordinance requirements. Dykes will
also check into who locally has fencing with this type of business. In summary,
the outstanding issues are the fencing, outdoor storage of vehicles, the
landscaping, and the elevation. These issues need to be reviewed by Planning
staff.
Edgeton opened the public hearing with the standard remarks. No comments
were received from the public.
6. LAND USE/ACTION ITEMS
A. Site Plan/Building Permit Authorizafion for Fire Stations No. 2 and No. 3
Expansion
City Planner Tom Lovelace presented the site plan building permit authorization
to allow remodeling and building additions to Apple Valley Fire Statons No. 2
and No. 3.
Lovelace reported that Fire Station No. 2 is located at the northwest comer of
Galaxie Avenue and 140'" Street West. The City is proposing to add. a 1,660 sq.
ft. truck bay and 1,350 sq. ft. of utility space to the south side of the existing
3,733 sq. ft. building. Nine additional pazking spaces will be added also.
Lovelace reported that Fire Station No. 3 is located along the north side of Essex
Avenue, just east of Pilot Knob Road, on approximately 2.23 acres. The City is
proposing to add 2,300 sq. ft., which would include a truck bay and utility rooms
to the west side of the building and 715 sq. ft. to the east side of the building.
Lovelace stated that a change in the exterior finish for both stations will be pazt
of the remodeling prof ect that will include a removal of the wood siding and
Mansard roofs and replacing it with a combination of brick and decorative block
with a flat roof. Tn addition, as pazt of the modeling of Fire Station No. 2., a
vaziance of 16 feet is requested from the required building setback of .50 feet
along 140a' Street West. The irregular shape of the lot and the soil conditions
precludes the addition being located anywhere else on the properly.
Lovelace reported that total construction of these two building additions will be
approximately $2.3 million in capital expenditures and that this allocation is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Edgeton asked if there were any questions or comments from the Commission
regarding this request. No questions or comments were made.
MOTION: Burke moved, seconded by Bergman, to approve the site
plan/building permit authorization to allow for the construction of a 3,010 sq. ft.
addition to Apple Valley Fire Station No. 2 as proposed, subject to the following
condition:
• Approval of a variance of 16 feet from the required building setback
of 50 feet along 140`" Street West because. of the hardship caused due
to the irregular shape of the lot; and the soil conditions on the north
and east sine of the building.
• Approval of the site plan building permit authorization to allow for the
construction of a 3,015 sq. ft. addition to Apple Valley Fire Station No.
3, as proposed.
• Approval of the draft resolution, stating that the proposed improvements
to Fire Stations No. 2 and No. 3 are in conformance with the Apple
Valley Comprehensive Plan.
The motions passed unanimously 7-0.
B Site Plan/Building Permit Authorizafion for Outdoor Pafio for Bogarts
Assistant Planner Kathy Bodmer presented the site plan/building authorizaflon
for an outdoor patio/eating area to be constructed at Bogarts/Apple Place Bowl,
located at 14917 Garrett Avenue. The applicant is Rick Management, Inc.
Bodmer reported that Rick Management, Inc., requests site plan review and
approval of an outdoor patio addition to be constructed on the northeast corner of
the Bogarts/Apple Place Bowl building. The total area of the new patio is
proposed to be 3,500 sq. ft. and will seat approximately 60. The patio area will
be enclosed with a 40" wall constructed of double-faced rough cut block with a
decorative wrought iron top. Two patio areas will be constructed, one at ground
level, and the second will be elevated by eight inches (8").
Bodmer reported that traffic circulafion, number of parking spaces, and overall
layout of the patio addition have been reviewed by staff and meets the
requirements of the City zoning code. Bodmer reported that staff are
recommending approval of the site plan for the outdoor patio addition.
The applicant, Rick Wagner, appeazed before the Commission. Members of the
Commission asked if there were any outdoor restrictions for outdoor liquor.
Bodmer stated that Bogarts will have to appear before the City Council to extend
approval of outdoor liquor requirements. Commissioner Hadley asked if there
were any locked gates in the event of a fire hazard. Wagner stated that there will
be no locked gates and that the area will be accessible for the handicapped. The
Commission had concerns about pazking and if there needed to be any additional
parking. Bodmer stated that for outdoor pafios such as this, there aze no
additional parking requirements.
MOTION: Commissioner Melander moved, seconded by Burke, to recommend
approval of the site plan for the outdoor patio addition at the Bogarts/Apple Place
Bowl building at 14917 Garrett Avenue, in accordance with the plans submitted.
7. OTHER BUSINESS
8. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Burke moved, seconded by Churchill, to adjourn the meeting. Mofion carried
6-0.