Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/04/2003CITY OF APPLE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JANE 4, 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, James Hadley, Alan Duff, Jeannine Churchill, Tim Burke, David Schindler, and Tom Melander* *Commissioner Melander arrived at 7:01 p.m. Members Absent: None Staff Present: City Planner Tom Lovelace, City Attorney Sharon Hills, Assistant Planner Kathy Bodmer, Assistant Planner Margaret Milton Dykes, 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: Hadley moved, seconded by Duff, to approve the Agenda. The motion carved 6-0. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MAY 21, 2003 Edgeton asked if there were any changes to the minutes. There being none, she called for their approval. MOTION: Hadley moved, seconded by Duff, to approve the minutes. The motion carried 4-0, with Commissioners Schindler and Burke abstaining. 4. CONSENT ITEMS A. Grizzly's Grill `n Saloon -Consideration of an Outdoor Seating Area for Existing Restaurant Operation MOTION: Commissioner Burke moved, seconded by Duff, to approve the consent agenda in accordance with the staff recommendations. The motion carved 6-0. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Wellhead Protection Comprehensive Plan Amendment -Amendment to the Water Supply and Distribution Plan Section of the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan 2020 Update Chair Edgeton opened the public hearing with the standard remarks. Carol Blommel, the City's Public Works Supervisor of Utilities, presented an overview of the Wellhead Protection Plan. The Wellhead Protection Plan addresses the presence of certain hazardous materials within the most sensitive groundwater recharge zones located around municipal well fields. The Plan is part of the Water Supply and Distribution Plan and consequently, part of the overall Comprehensive Plan. Blommel discussed the delineation of the wellhead protection area, the drinking water supply management area boundary, and the well and drinking water supply management area vulnerability assessment. Commissioner Churchill asked Blommel if the gravel mining in the southern part of the City has any affect on the wells. Blommel stated the wells are protected with a confining layer and wells that are not operational are sealed. Chair Edgeton asked if water run-off is a problem. Blommel stated the ground acts as a natural filter. Chair Edgeton questioned the effect of septic systems to the wells and if the City has a plan to either eliminate septic systems or make them safer. Blommel stated the City currently has about 80 septic systems that are monitored by both the City and County and residents are required by the City's Inspection Department to have septic systems pumped every 3 years. Commissioner Melander asked if there is a possibility of the acquifer getting too dry from all of the water pumped out of it. Blommel stated that the Jordan Acquifer is ofhigh-quality and there is no lack of supply. Blommel stated that if the water supply were to run low, measures such as a sprinkling ban would be taken. Commissioner Duff asked if security plans were in place to protect the water supply. Blommel stated that measures have been taken to protect the water supply such as installing alarms and changing locks. In addition, the City will have a plan completed by the year 2004 that addresses security. Chair Edgeton asked if anyone from the public was present to speak and if so, they may do so at this time. No comments were received from the public. Chair Edgeton closed the public hearing with the standard remarks. Normally the Commission opens the public hearing, takes comments, closes the public hearing, and defers action to the next Commission meeting. Since no comments were received from the public and no outstanding issues were raised, staff recommended the draft Wellhead Protection Plan be approved for adoption. MOTION: Commissioner Melander moved, seconded by Duff, to approve the draft Wellhead Protection Plan. The motion carried 7-0. B. Legacy of Apple Valley -Phase II -Amendments to the Planned Development Ordinance, Replat of an Existing Lot and Site Plan/Building Permit Authorization to Allow for the Construction of a 16,855 sq. ft. two- story Office Building Chair Edgeton opened the public hearing with the standard remarks. Mazgazet Dykes, Assistant Planner, presented the request from the Hartford Group, for an amendment to zoning district "PD-716, zone 2" to allow for office uses and to increase the density of residential uses, subdivision of Lot 1, Block 1, The Legacy of Apple Valley; into three lots to accornrnodate high density residential and office uses, and site plan building permit authorization for an approximately 17,000 sq. ft. office building. Dykes reported the applicant wishes to construct a 17,000 sq. ft. office building and a 36-unit, four story apartment building. The apartment building would be used by Dakota County Community Development Agency (CDA) for supportive housing. Staff expects the CDA to submit an application for site plan building permit authorization for the supportive housing building for review at its June 18`h, 2003 meeting. Dykes reported the property is zoned "PD-716, subzone 2" (Planned Development), which allows for high-density apartment uses only. The applicant is requesting an amendment to the zoning ordinance to allow for office uses, and to increase the allowable density for apartrnents. Currently, the zoning ordinance allows 47 units per acre for general occupancy apartments and 54 units per acre for apartment buildings for seniors. The applicant is requesting the ordinance be amended to also allow general occupancy apartments to have a density of 54 units per acre. The plans show the subdivision of an existing 6.66 acre lot (the Tuscany Apartment site) into three lots. Lot 1, the Tuscany Apartments site, would be 5.28 acres; the office building site will be 0.71 acres, and the supportive housing site will be .67 acres. All of the lots meet City requirements. The site plan shows a 17,000 sq. ft. two-story office building, and a four story 36 unit apartment building, which will tota132,000 sq. ft. Both the office building and the supportive housing building will cover 27% of their respective lots. The supportive housing building and parking lot cover approximately 85% of the lot. The zoning ordinance requires a maximum impervious surface coverage of 70%. A variance would be needed or the site plan will have to be altered to meet the 70% imperious surface coverage. Commissioner Melander is concerned about the storm water run-off with the amount of impervious surface. Jacob Fick, Assistant Engineer, stated that staff looked at the worst case scenario and was not concerned about the stonn water run-off. Commissioners Schindler and Churchill were concerned that with the small amount of green space available, where will people that live in the supportive housing go for green space. The elevations for the office building indicate it will be composed of stucco and rock face block, which is similar to the Tuscany Building. Elevation drawings for the supportive housing building have not been submitted at this time. Dykes reported that staff have concerns with parking. The applicant is proposing a shared parking model to provide parking for all three uses. The Tuscany Aparhnent building will have 285 underground spaces (1.17/unit), and the supportive housing building would have 16 underground spaces (.5/unit). However, there are no underground parking spaces proposed for the office building. The total number ofpazking spaces shown are 508,. which is 90 short of the required number of spaces. The applicant has presented a shared parking model that shows there will be adequate parking. However, the City's Traffic Consultant, Glen Van Wormer, had some serious concerns about its assumptions. The Planning Commission also expressed concerns about adequate parking. Chair Edgeton stated that she can't see supporting an office building that does not provide adequate parking. Commissioner Melander stated that due to the large number of offices proposed within the building, he also cannot see supporting an office building with inadequate no parking. In addition, Melander stated that it might be difficult to rent office space to tenants with no parking available. The City's Engineer and Natural Resources Coordinator have no grading or landscape issues with this project. Bill Griffith, representing the Hartford Group, addressed the Commission. Griffith stated they understand the concerns of the Commission in regards to parking and that they will continue to work on pazking. He stated they would utilize some street parking to assist with the demand. Griffith stated that funding is also an issue as it relates to underground parking fora 2-story building. Chair Edgeton reiterated to Griffith that she likes the idea and concept of the live/work scenario but the lack ofpazking is inadequate and she would have to be convinced otherwise in order to support this project. Members of the Commission would also like to see more outdoor open space and/or access to open green space. Chair Edgeton asked if any one from the public was present to speak, and if so, they may do so at this time. No comments were received from the public. Chair Edgeton closed the public hearing with the standard comments. 6. LAND USE/ACTION ITEMS A. Andy's Market -Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning, Conditional Use Permit, and Site Plan/Building Permit Authorization to Allow for a Car Wash Margaret Dykes, Assistant Planner, presented the request from Andy's Market to construct aone-bay car wash on the north end of the building. The applicant is requesting an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan changing the designation of the property to "C" (Commercial) in order to rezone the property. The applicant is also requesting a rezoning from "NCC" (Neighborhood Convenience Center) to "RB" (Retail Business) to accommodate a car wash, which is allowed via a conditional use permit. The Planning Commission indicated at a previous meeting that it might support a rezoning of the property provided any site design issues could be resolved. Dykes reported a car wash facility requires a conditional use permit in a retail business zone. The City code states that a car wash must be restricted to one bay and must be incorporated into the primary structure. The proposed car wash meets these requirements. The Commission stated at previous meetings (the sketch plan review and public hearing) that if approved, it would require the doors of the car wash to be closed at all times to lessen noise from the car wash due to the nearby singe family residences. In addition, staff recommended the car wash hours be limited to 6:00 am to 10:00 p.m. daily as per the noise ordinance. The existing building and gas canopy aze 7,200 sq. @. total and the proposed car wash is approximately 1,550 sq. fl. The lot coverage will be 18%, which meets City code requirements. The car wash addition is shown on the north side of the existing building. A 13-foot-wide drive lane for the car wash is located on the far north side of the site abutting the north property line. Customers will drive along the north side of the property and enter the car wash on the west side of the lot. Dykes reported the site has two entrances and an additional entrance that is shared with Scott Park. The site plan now shows a painted directional divider in the north entrance, as well as signs limiting the access to right in/right out only. The painted directional divider must also be concrete to actually restrict customers from leaving the site. The applicant would be responsible for installing the concrete divider. A public hearing was held at the Planning Commission's May 21, 2003, meeting and several issues were raised by the Commission in regard to the site layout and traffic. Dykes has addressed these issues in her written report to the Commission. It appears that the applicant has modified the plans and addressed most of the concerns of the City's Traffic Consultant, Glen Van Wormer. The applicant has modified the car wash drive aisle and the auto cashier stand to better accommodate customers. Commissioner Schindler is still not satisfied with traffic and has suggested that the north entrance to Andy's Market be totally closed off. However, in previous discussions, the City's Traffic Consultant felt this would create more problems if the north entrance were totally shut down versus having the right in/right-out turn. Commissioners Churchill and Duff recommended having an in-only access to the north:entrance. Dykes reported a variance is needed for the drive lane reducing the setback from the required 15 feet to zero feet. The boulevard area on the south side of 140m Street W. is 40 feet wide, which is wider than the typica130 foot wide minor arterial street. Although a variance is not necessary to relieve a demonstrable hardship, it does allow the applicant to locate a drive aisle that meets City standards and retain parking spaces on the north side of the lot. Landscape plans have been reviewed and recommendations made by the City's Natural Resource's Coordinator. Dykes reported staff is recommending approval of the project based on the conditions outlined in her report. MOTION: Commissioner Burke moved, seconded by Hadley, to recommend approval of a Comprehensive Plan designation from "NS" (Neighborhood Service to "C" (Commercial). The motion passed with a vote of 6-1. MOTION: Commissioner Burke moved, seconded by Hadley, to recommend approval of a zoning change from "NCC" (Neighborhood Commercial) to "RB" (Retail Business). The motion passed with a vote of 6-1. MOTION: Commissioner Burke moved, seconded by Hadley, to recommend approval of a Conditional Use Permit for an approximately 30' by 60' one-bay car wash as shown on the plans dated May 28, 2003, with the following conditions: a. The entrance and exit doors to the car wash shall remain closed during the wash and dry cycles. b. The car wash shall be operational only between the hours of 6:00 am and 10:00 p.m. daily. c. The applicant shall install signs and a concrete directional divider or some other City-approved structure in the northern-most entrance to the site limiting traffic to right-in/right-out only. Such structure shall be in accordance with City design standards. d. Signage shall be installed directing customers to the car wash lane. e. Signage shall be installed for vehicles exiting the car wash. f. The pedestrian crosswalk linking the north parking spaces to the store shall be relocated. The motion passed 7-0. MOTION: Commissioner Burke moved, seconded by Hadley, to recommend approval of an approximately 30' X 60' one-bay car wash as shown on the submitted site plans dated May 28, 2003, provided the car wash adhere to applicable City codes. The motion tamed 7-0. MOTION: Commissioner Burke moved, seconded by Hadley, to recommend approval of a variance to reduce the setback for the car wash drive lane from 15 feet to 0 feet. The motion carried 7-0. B. Seasons on the Park -Front Yard Setback Variance for Attached Garage Kathy Bodmer, Assistant Planner, presented the request from Manley Brothers Construction for a variance for the property at 12488 Empress Court, to encroach two feet into the front yard setback. The front yard setback in the R-3 zoning district is thirty feet (30'). The variance is requested to allow the front of the garage to be located twenty-eight feet (28') from the front property line. Bodmer reported the house plans contained an error in the dimension of the depth of the west wall of the home. The footings were poured and framing was underway when it was discovered that the basement plan called for the west wall of the home to be thirty-nine (39') feet deep, while the first floor plans called for the west wall to be forty-one (41') feet deep, resulting in a two foot (2') discrepancy between the two plans. The variance is needed to allow the construction of the garage as originally planned. The plans indicate the garage would be twenty-six (26') feet deep, while the typical garage is twenty-four feet (24 `) deep. Because the footings have been poured and the framing is underway, it would not be feasible to simply push the entire home back from the setback line. hi addition, the trusses have been cut and are currently located on the site. Modifying the garage dimensions would require reworking the plans and obtaining additional building materials. Bodmer stated that staff reviews variance applications based strictly upon the requirements of the state statutes and the city code that require a demonstrated physical hardship be present in order to grant one and that logical alternatives are not available to the applicant. Unfortunately, a mistake in the building plans is not considered a hardship. A logical alternative would simply be to shorten up the garage but this would alter the appearance of the home, require a major reworking of the building plans, and result in a waste of the pre-cut building materials. However, staff finds that the curve of the property line and design of the street would result in minimal encroachment into the front yard setback, no restriction of the site lines along the cul-de-sac, and minimal impact to surrounding properties and, therefore, are recommending a variance be granted to preserve the architectural character of the home. MOTION: Commissioner Burke moved, seconded by Duff, that a variance be granted to preserve the architectural character of the home. The motion passed 7- 0. C. Amendment to Restaurant Parking -Proposed Amendment to Zoning Ordinance to Increase the Required Number of Parking Spaces for Restaurants Margaret Dykes, Assistant Planner, reported that at the May 7, 2003, Planning Commission Meeting, a public hearing was held to consider changes to portions of the zoning ordinance pertaining to off-street parking for restaurants. The City code presently requires that restaurant uses provide one (1)off-street parking space per three (3) customer seats based on capacity design. At the public hearing, the Commission indicated that any revised ordinance should also include provisions for outdoor seating areas and waiting/lounge areas, as well as differentiate between restaurants that serve liquor and those that do not serve liquor. In addition based on the Institute of Traffic Engineers Parking Generation Manual, staff recommended including parking for employees based on the largest work shift. No comments were received from the public at the hearing. Dykes reported that if restaurants were required to have employee parking, parking for outdoor seating, and parking for waiting areas, it would significantly increase the number of required parking spaces, resulting in a number of restaurants being overparked. Therefore, staff recommended that the City change the restaurant parking requirements to 1 space per 2.5 customer seats and continue monitoring the effects of the ordinance change. If it is determined that such parking is necessary, the City could change it to include parking for employees, outdoor seats, and bar or waiting areas. Chair Edgeton stated that she is concerned about not considering outdoor seating in the parking formula. Commissioners Churchill and Schindler also felt that outdoor seating needs to be factored in, but perhaps not given as much weight as regular seating. Commissioner Duff agrees with staff s recommendation but would also like outdoor seating considered. MOTION: Comrissioner Hadley moved, seconded by Duff, to recommend approval of an amendment to Section 155.379 (P) of the City's zoning ordinance as follows: Class I restaurants with liquor licenses, Class I restaurants without liquor licenses, and Class IlI restaurants : 1 space per 2.5 customer seats, and 1 space per 5 outdoor seats, excluding the first 10 seats. For Class II restaurants: ] space per 3 customer seats; and six stacking spaces for each drive-in window. The motion carried 7-0. D. I{rispy Kreme -Amend Planned Development Zoning Ordinance, Replat Outlot G, Fischer Market Place, and Site Plan Review fora 4,693 sq. ft. Bakery on a 1.6 Acre Site City Planner Tom Lovelace presented the request from Glazed Investments, LLC, to consider an amendment to Planned Development Zoning District No. 646 to allow for a drive up window in conjunction with a bakery and changes to the permitted signage within the development, and site plan review for a proposed 4,693 sq. ft. Krispy Kreme bakery with a drive thru window on 1.65 acres of a 3.99 acre outlot in the Fischer Market Place development. The site is located at the intersection of County Road 42 and Flagstaff Avenue. The applicant provided elevations of the building that indicate an exterior finish of rock face block, brick, and stucco. The appearance and material choices are consistent with the existing structures in the Fischer Market Place Development. A 12 ft. high X 10 ft. wide sign will be attached to the bottom of the existing pylon sign located at the intersection of Flagstaff Avenue and County Road 42. Lovelace stated that replatting of the outlot into two lots, as proposed by the applicant, shall be required prior to the issuance of any building permits. Lovelace also informed the applicant that revisions to the plans should be made as per the Assistant Engineer and Natural Resources Coordinator's comments that were identified in their respective memos, which are included with this report. Commissioner Hadley questioned the requirement of an infiltration system to hold a 1/z inch rainfall. Assistant Engineer Fick stated that this has become standard practice for projects because the first %z inch of rainfall has the most debris in it so the City is requiring the infiltration systems to catch the debris up front. It also improves the quality of water. A public hearing was held at the Planning Commission Meeting on May 21, 2003. The City's Traffic Consultant identified several concerns in regards to traffic which were outlined in a letter to the Commission. Lovelace stated that changes would be required in the future if there are traffic problems at the Florence Trail/Flagstaff Avenue intersection. In addition, it is not expected that the building on Lot 1 will be constructed at the same time as the bakery. In order to provide adequate circulation for the bakery facility, it may be necessary to construct the driveway off Florence Trail I Lot 1 and an access drive from the I{rispy Kreme site to that driveway. MOTION: Commissioner Melander moved, seconded by Duff, to approve the amendment to section A24-4 of Planned Development Ordinance No. 646 to allow for a maximum of one bakery operation with a drive up window in Zone 2. The motion passed 7-0. MOTION: Commissioner Melander move, seconded by Duff, to approve an amendment to section A24-6 of Planned Development Ordinance No. 646 to allow an additional 80 sq. ft. of signage on the pylon sign located at the corner of County Road 42 and Flagstaff Avenue. The motion passed 7-0. MOTION: Commissioner Melander moved, seconded by Duff, to approve site plan building permit authorization to allow for the construction of a 4,693 sq. ft. building on Lot 2, Block 1, Fischer Market Place 8th Addition, subject to the following conditions: • No building permit shall be issued until the final plat for the Fischer Market Place 8`h Addition has been recorded with Dakota County. • Across parking and access agreement shall be executed between property owners of Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Fischer Market Place 8`h Addition, prior to the issuance of a building pemrit. • The access driveway from Florence Trail to Lot 1 and an access drive from the Krispy Kreme site to that drive shall be installed concurrently with the construction of the bakery. • All items identified in the Assistant City Engineer's May 13, 2003, report shall be adhered to prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. • Revisions shall be made to the landscape plan as per the Natural Resources Coordinator's comments as indicated in his May 16, 2003 memo. • An agreement shall be executed between the City and the Fischer Market Place 8th Addition property owners that will identify the procedure and responsibility for improvements to the Florence TraiUFlagstaff Avenue intersection prior to issuance of a building permit. • Revisions shall be made to the site plan that identifies the addition of a pedestrian connection from Florence Trail to the site constructed in accordance with the requirements set forth in Planned Development Ordinance No. 646. The motion passed 7-0. E. Wal-Mart Conditional User Permit Amendment to Allow for Expansion of the Permanent Outdoor Garden Display and Sales Center Tom Lovelace, City Planner, presented the request from Wal-Mart Real Estate Trust, for an amendment to their existing conditional use permit (CUP) to allow for the expansion of their permanent outdoor garden center, located at 7835 150ei Street West. The existing conditional use permit allows for the construction of an 8,024 sq. ft. permanent garden store outdoor display and sales area that is 10 enclosed by a decorative ornamental picket fence located along the east side of the building with a small portion extending to the west in front of the store. Lovelace reported the applicant is requesting the addition of 4,306 sq. ft. to the existing permanent garden area, which would extend further to the west 109 feet. The addition would result in the loss of 2 parking spaces. The store currently has 612 parking spaces, which is 40 over the minimum required by city code. During the public hearing that was held at the May 21, 2003, Planning Commission Meeting, the Commission expressed concern about the appearance and use of the existing gazden center. They felt the existing garden center is unattractive and items that have nothing to do with gardening are being stored in the area. The Commission informed the applicant that unless the existing azea is cleaned up, they would not consider an expansion of any kind. The Commission also suggested getting rid of the wrought iron fence and replacing it with brick oz block walls to improve the aesthetics of the building and would prevent the stored products from being seen by the public. However, the applicant did not submit any revised plans addressing the Commission's concerns expressed at the public heating. Lovelace reported that staff is recommending approval of the amendment to the CUP based on the conditions outlined in their staff report to the Commission. The conditions address the appearance of the building and state that only lawn and garden supplies can be displayed in the area. Commissioner Churchill stated that when the original building was approved, the Commission spent a great deal of time coming up with a store front look that would be appealing and now it appeazs the applicant is changing it considerably from the original plans and, therefore, she cannot support these changes that are proposed. Commissioner Melander stated that the addition is too much of a deviation from the original plans and he cannot support it either. MOTION: Commissioner Burke moved, seconded by Hadley, to recommend approval of an amendment to Conditional Use Permit No. 1997-274 to allow for the expansion of the permanent outdoor gazden center along the front elevation of the existing Wal-Mart store located at 7835 150a' Street West, subject to the following conditions: • The decorative fencing around the existing and expanded permanent outdoor garden center shall consist of combination masonry wall and ornamental picket fence. • The masonry section of the wall shall be constructed of the same materials and shall be the same height as the existing cart corral wall. • The maximum height of the fence shall be 10 feet. • No fencing shall be allowed in front of the entrance door to the exiting seasonal shop. it • A sidewalk with a minimum depth of 12 feet shall be required in front of the south side of the gazden center. • Only lawn and garden supplies shall be displayed in the permanent outdoor garden center. The motion was failed with a vote of 0 in favor, and 7 opposed. 8. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Commissioner Hadley moved, seconded by Duff, to adjourn the meeting at 9:32 p.m. The motion passed with a 7-0 vote. 12