Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/19/2003CITY OF APPLE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 19, 2003 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, David Schindler, James Hadley, *Tim Burke, Tom Melander, and Alan Duff *Arrived at 7:02 p.m. Members Absent: Jeannine Churchill Staff Present: Community Development Director Rick Kelley, City Planner Tom Lovelace, City Attorney Sharon Hills, Assistant Planner Kathy Bodmer, and Assistant City Engineer Jacob Fick. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Edgeton asked if there were any changes to the Agenda. There being none, she called for its approval. MOTION: Schindler moved, seconded by Hadley, to approve the Agenda. The motion carved 5-0. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 2003 Edgeton asked if there were any changes to the minutes. There being none, she called for their approval. MOTION: Hadley moved, seconded by Schindler, to approve the minutes. The motion carried 5-0. 4. CONSENT ITEMS A. Legacy Square Townhomes -Model Home Building Permit MOTION: Hadley moved, seconded by Melander, to approve the consent agenda in accordance with the staff recommendations. The motion carried 5-0. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS None. 6. LAND USE/ACTION ITEMS A. Dahle Oaks Townhomes -Rezoning, Preliminary Plat, and Site P1anBuilding Permit Authorization for 17 Unit Townhouse Development Tabled at the request of the Petitioner. OTHER BUSINESS A. Apple Valley Housing -Sketch Plan Assistant Planner Kathy Bodmer presented the sketch plan review from Archetone, proposing atownhouse/condominium project on a vacant parcel located on the southwest corner of Cedar Avenue and 140`h Street West. Bodmer stated that the petitioner is seeking feedback regarding this proposed prof ect. The project is located on a 3.6 acre parcel immediately east of the recently approved Summerhill of Apple Valley development. Eighty-eight total units are proposed. Twenty-eight units are proposed to be in four row townhouse buildings, a combination of thirty units of two-story townhomes and thirty units of single-story condominiums in a single 4- storybuilding. The row townhouses will have 2-stall garages while the large condominium building would have 2 levels of underground parking. A center courtyard would be in the middle of the site between the townhomes providing green-space for the development. Bodmer stated that the existing trees on this property are mostly box elder, ehn, and cottonwood. Bodmer displayed a picture of the property from Cedar Avenue facing west. Bodmer reported the property is zoned "M-8C" which allows high density apartment buildings at 12-24 units per acre, provided density bonus requirements are met. The size of the site will need to be verified to confirm the allowable density. Bodmer stated that townhouse buildings are permitted in Zones M-1 (multiple family with 3-4 units per acre) to M-6 (multiple family with 6-12 units per acre). Apartment buildings are permitted in Zones M-4 (6-8 units per acre) to M-8 (12-24 units per acre). A condominium with separate outdoor entrances to each of the units would be classified as a townhouse type dwelling, while a condominium with share entrances would be considered an aparhnent type dwelling. Chair Edgeton and Commissioner Hadley requested that staff clarify whether or not the density fits into the townhouse type dwelling or apartment type dwelling before proceeding with this project. Commissioner Hadley suggested that maybe the zoning code should be amended in relationship to the density. James Povolny, from Archetone, reviewed the sketch plan with the Commission. The Commission was concerned that the number of surface pazking spaces shown on the plan may not be sufficient. Bodmer stated that the code requires 1.5 surface spaces minimum per unit. At 88 units, 132 surface spaces would be required. Forty-three surface spaces are shown. However, excess garage parking is proposed for the development. The plan indicates 2.0 garage spaces would be provided per unit, which could offset some of the surface parking required. However, this does not address visitor parking. Commissioner Melander is concerned. that when residents have special events, there would not be adequate parking. The Commission stated that parking should be cazefully reviewed before proceeding with this project. Commissioner Duff would like to see a visual image of the proposed project that would include landscaping. He also inquired as to the squaze footage and price range of the units. Todd Young, of I~KE Architects, stated that he did not have any elevations available tonight, but would be happy to provide them. In regards to price range, the petitioner stated they would be in the $265,000 to $425,000 price range. Chair Edgeton reiterated the need for colored elevations. She is concerned about the appearance of the back of the townhomes along Cedar Avenue and what the townhouses look like driving by, particulazly with the garages. Commissioner Burke wants to ensure sure that the architecture of the homes make the front garages less prominent. Commissioner Schindler raised the issue of providing adequate space for the drive aisle coming out of the garage. Hasham Tobaz, the developer, addressed the Commission and stated that setbacks are an issue for him in so faz as providing adequate surface pazking. He stated that if the setbacks could be reduced, it would allow him to provide more surface pazking. Chair Edgeton informed Tobaz that another way to provide adequate surface parking would be to reduce the density and that economics are not a factor for the Commission when reviewing a project. Chair Edgeton recommended that Tobaz work with staff to get their input on what, if anything, can be done with setbacks for his development. After discussion of this proposed sketch plan, the consensus of the Commission directed the applicant to address some of the issues brought 3 up, continue working with staff, and present another sketch plan for their review. 8. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Commissioner Hadley moved, seconded by Duff, to adjourn the meeting at 7:52 p.m. The motion carved 6-0.