HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/21/2004CITY OF APPLE VALLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
APRIL 21, 2004
1. CALL TO ORDER
The City of Apple Valley Planning Commission meeting was called to Order by Chair
Kazen Edgeton at 7:00 p.m.
Members Present: Karen Edgeton, Jeannine Churchill, Alan Duff, Tim Burke; and Tom
Melander
Members Absent: Jim Hadley and David Schindler
Staff Present: Community Development Director Rick Kelley, City Planner Tom Lovelace,
Associate City Planner Kathy Bodmer, City Attorney Sharon Hills, and Assistant City
Engineer Jacob Fick.
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Chair Edgeton asked if there were any changes to the Agenda. There being none; she called
for its approval.
MOTION: Commissioner Burke moved, seconded by Duff, to approve the Agenda. The
motion carried 5-0.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF APRIL 7, 2004
Chair Edgeton asked if there were any changes to the minutes. There being none, she called
for its approval.
MOTION: Commissioner Churchill moved, seconded by Burke, to approve the minutes of
Apri17, 2004. The motion carried 4-0, with Commissioner Melander abstaining.
4. CONSENT ITEMS
A. Burrow Height Variance -Consideration of a Variance from the Maximum
Residenfial Building Height Requirement of 35 feet to Allow the Construction of
a 42 Feet Single Family Home
B. Amendments to Swimming Pool and Landscape Pond Ordinance -Set Public
Hearing
MOTION: Commissioner Burke moved, seconded by Duff to approve the consent
Agenda. The motion carried 6-0.
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
None.
6. LAND USE/ACTION ITEMS
A. Dahle Oaks Height Variance -Consideration of a Variance from the Maximum
Residential Building Height Requirement of 35 Feet to Allow Relocation of
Existing Single Family Home that will have a Maximum Height of 48 Feet
Associate City Planner Kathy Bodmer introduced the request from Dahle Bros. for a
height variance for an existing A-frame house located at 12810 Galaxie Avenue.
The property was recently approved for the development of Dahle Oaks and is now
zoned "R-2" (Single family, minimum lot 18,000 sq. ft.) The R-2 zoning district
limits the height of a single family home to 35 feet. The A-frame is 48 feet high at
the rear walkout elevation.
Bodmer reported the permit for the existing A-frame was approved by Lebanon
Township in April 1965. The building permit stated that the height of the building
was 32;' tall. The building permit was likely measured from the main floor living
area up to the peak of the roof, rather than from grade level to the peak. In addition,
the home was constructed in an "A" (Agriculture) zoning district which had no
height restrictions at that time.
The development of Dahle Oaks calls for the home to be relocated from its present
location to Lot 1, Block 2. Because the home is being moved, it is considered a new
structure and must comply with current codes. While the home appears to have been
in compliance when it was initially constructed, a variance is needed now.
The home is an existing 3-story A-frame with a tuck under garage on the south
elevation. The height of the home is 40 feet tall from grade around most of the
building. In the area of the tuck-under garage, the home is 48 feet from grade. The
height of the building will be the same in its new location as it is presently.
Bodmer reported that in order to grant a variance, the City code requires a
demonstrated. physical hardship to be present and that logical alternatives are not
available to the applicant. The home is an existing structure that appears to be in
excellent condition. Alternatives available to the petitioner such as removing the top
13 feet of the home are not very realistic. The hardship encountered by the petitioner
is the need to bring a legal non-conforming structure into compliance with the
current zoning code. Bodmer also stated that when the ordinance was developed, it
did not measure the home from grade on all four sides of the home. Staff is in the
process of amending the ordinance to take that into consideration. Therefore, staff is
recommending approval of the variance.
MOTION: Commissioner Burke moved, seconded by Duff, to recommend approval
of a height variance based upon the hardship created by the fact that the home is an
existing, legal, non-conforming structure that is simply being relocated in accordance
with the approved Dahle Oaks. The motion passed 5-0.
B. Human Building Coverage Variance -Consideration of a Variance from the
Maximum 20% Building Coverage in Planned Development No. 400 to Allow
for the Construction of an Addition to a Single Family Home
Associate City Planner Kathy Bodmer presented the request by Kevin and Julie
Human, of 7249 158th Street West, for a variance from the lot area coverage
requirement in PD-400 to add a 20' x 14' (280 sq. ft.) addition onto the rear of their
house. The zoning ordinance restricts the maximum building coverage to 20% of the
area of the lot. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow 22.2% building
coverage on the lot in order to construct the proposed addition.
Bodmer reported that PD-400, Zone 1 contains single family lots, which allows a
minimum lot area of 8,400 sq. ft., while the typical residential lot in an R-3 zoning
district is 11,000 sq. ft. The amount of building coverage is also restricted in several
of these planned development zoning districts with small residential lots in order to
ensure that the home, any accessory structures, and impervious surface. do not exceed
a total of 25% impervious coverage on the lot.
The Human's lot is 9,100 sq. ft. At 20% coverage, the Humans are permitted to
have 1,820 sq. ft. of building coverage. The footprint of the existing home is 1,737
sq. ft., resulting in 19% building coverage. The Humans wish to construct a 20' x
14' (280 sq. ft.) addition onto the rear of their home, which would bring the total
building coverage to 2,017 sq. ft., resulting in 22.2% coverage.
Bodmer reported that in order to grant a variance, the City code requires a
demonstrated physical hardship to be present and that logical alternatives are not
available to the applicant. The only way the Humans could construct the addition
without increasing the size of the footprint would be to construct an additional story
onto the existing home, which would increase the massing of the home and make the
structure different than others in the neighborhood. Another alternative would be to
purchase a new home that is large enough to accommodate the growing family.
Bodmer pointed out that homeowners in other small lot developments may wish to
construct similar additions, so issues of precedent will need to be considered when
evaluating this request.
Bodmer stated that he City Engineer did not have a concern with the requested
variance and the resulting impervious surface coverage. He stated that the size of the
addition and the amount of additional coverage would be miniscule. He also agreed
with Bodmer's earlier comments that variances like this for additional building area
coverage will need to be reviewed on a case-by-case basis to determine the impacts
on the stormwater drainage system. The storm sewer system is adequately sized to
handle the additional run-off.
Bodmer reported is recommending approval of the variance with certain conditions
because the City Engineer has reviewed the request and determined that the
3
additional impervious surface area will not place a burden on the existing storm
sewer system, and that constructing the addition on to the rear of the home will help
to ensure that the addition will be constructed in a manner that will keep the height
and massing of the home consistent with adjacent homes in the neighborhood.
Commissioner Churchill commented that she does not want the Commission to set
the wrong precedent and, therefore, is recommending that parameters be set on the
increase in impervious surface.
MOTION: Commissioner Burke moved, seconded by Duff, to approve the variance
based on the following findings:
• The addition to the home is in keeping with the City's goal to help
homeowners to stay and improve their existing residences;
• The City Engineer has determined that the amount of increased
surface area will not negatively impact the stormwater system in-this
area;
• The addition on the. rear of the home will keep the home consistent in
architectural form as the other homes in the neighborhood;
• The addition will not negatively impact adjacent properties; and
• The request results in no more than a small (10%) increase above the
otherwise permitted coverage.
The motion passed 5-0.
C. Amendments to the "LB" Zoning District -Consideration to Amend "LB"
(Limited Business) Zoning District to Allow Accessory Structures as a
Conditional Use Permit in Conjunction with Private Clubs, Lodges, and
Churches
City Planner Tom Lovelace presented the proposed amendment to the "LB" (Limited
Business) zoning district that would allow recreational structures, such as open air
shelters, gazebos, and pavilions, in conjunction with institutional uses, private clubs,
and lodges not operated for a profit, subject to certain conditions.
Lovelace reported that presently accessory stmctures are not permitted within the
"LB" zoning district. This amendment would allow for open air recreational
structures as a conditional use. The amendment also includes several conditions
which staff feels will mitigate anticipated adverse impacts, protect value of other
property in the zoning district, and achieve the goals of the comprehensive plan.
Lovelace reported a public hearing was held for this item on Apri17, 2004. No
comments were received from the public. The Commission did make some
recommendations which Lovelace has incorporated in the amendment.
Chair Edgeton was still concerned about the use of electronic sound systems and
audio equipment being used in an unreasonably loud manner. Lovelace reported that
it will be guided by the City's noise ordinance which would be enforced by police.
MOTION: Commissioner Melander moved, seconded by Burke, to approve the draft
ordinance amendment that amends Section 155.203 of Chapter 155 of the code to
include recreational structures, such as open air shelters, gazebos, and pavilions, as a
conditional use in conjunction with institutional uses, and private clubs and lodges
not operated for a profit, along with conditions for said use. The motion passed 5-0.
D. The Legacy of Apple Valley North -Consideration of a Proposed Subdivision of
25.3 Acres to Allow for Mixed Use Development and Site P1anBuilding Permit
Authorization for Two Commercial Buildings
City Planner Tom Lovelace presented the request from the Legacy Village of Apple
Valley, LLC, for approval of a proposed subdivision of approximately 25 acres into
sixteen (16) lots to allow for a mixed use development, and site plan building pemut
authorization for two commercial buildings located along the north side of 153Ta
Street West, between Galante and Forteeza Lanes. Lovelace stated that the applicant
is requesting preliminary plat approval so that all of the utilities and infrastructure
can be installed at one time.
The site plan proposes six multi-story buildings located along the north side of 153~a
Street West; three town office buildings along the west side of Foliage Avenue; and
two apartment, and six residential townhouse buildings located in the north and
central part of the parcel. The development would create 247,360 sq. ft. of
commercial office/retail space, 506 multi-family residential dwelling units, and a 1.7
acre park. The bank drive-thru originally proposed is not included on the revised
plan.
In his report, Lovelace outlined several issues that were raised by staff and the
Commission at the public hearing on Apri17, 2004. Since the time of the public
hearing and Lovelace's report, the applicant has submitted revised plans in an effort
to address these concerns. Because the plans were received late, staff has not had a
chance to review the revisions. A meeting with the Parks and Recreation Advisory
Committee was also held Tuesday, Apri12Q 2004. The Committee expressed some
of the concerns it had in relation to the parks proposed for the area. The applicant
has since revised the park plans. A copy of the revised plan was distributed at the
meeting.
Lovelace reported that the Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee still have
issues with the size of the parkland dedicated. Chair Edgeton stated that the
Planning Commission has to review the plan based on the City Council's fmal
approval, ordinances, and accompanying documents and not the Parks Committee.
Bill Griffith, representing the applicant, indicated that since the meeting of the Parks
Committee, they have increased the size of the central park to 2.9 acres.
Commissioner Churchill was concerned about emergency vehicles having access to
the two residential units along the west side of the park. Lovelace stated that before
any building permits are approved, the City's Fire Marshal would review them and
make sure access is available for emergency vehicles.
Commissioner Melander asked about the amount of impervious surface with the
proposed plan. Lovelace stated the applicant has not yet provided that number but
the ordinance requires 70% maximum impervious surface. If the 70% is not met, the
applicant could request an ordinance amendment. Chair Edgeton was concerned
about the impervious surface in relation to drainage. Assistant Engineer Fick stated
that the Home Depot pond was sized to handle the drainage as long as it is within the
70% impervious surface.
The site plan shows several small pocket parks with a water feature. Chair Edgeton
requested staff ensure that the parks are aesthetically fixnctional with water and not
dried up.
Forteeza Lane and Gala Path have been eliminated on the revised plan. Chair
Edgeton was concerned if eliminating them would cause the grid pattern expected in
the plan to go away. Lovelace stated the elimination of the two streets actually cause
the grid pattern to be more in line with the overall plan.
Bill Griffith, representing the applicant, stated that they have worked very hard to
meet the park dedication requirement and have included smaller pocket parks which
could be maintained by an association but open to the public. He stated that the land
would be dedicated and could not be buildable. In addition, the water parks could
serve as infiltration. Griffith stated that Fresco Terrace would be widened enough to
allow for an arts festival, programs, and small performances, similar to the Excelsior
and Grand area in St. Louis Park.
The Natural Resources Coordinator reviewed the plan and made some suggestions to
the plantings. Griffith stated they would incorporate the changes suggested by the
Natural Resources Coordinator.
In regards to parking, Griffith indicated that parking will be broken up with islands
and will provide nine foot-wide sidewalks as recommended by staff.
Glen Van Wormer, the City's Traffic Engineer, reviewed the overall traffic plan.
Van Wormer stated that taking out Forteeza Lane and Gala Path make the traffic
more manageable. Van Wormer stated that the traffic plan is sufficient and that only
a few minor operations need to be worked out.
Randy Johnson, Director of Parks and Recreation, distributed a memo to the
Planning Commission regarding park related issues he has with the development. He
feels that the developer has made progress regarding their issues since the Park
Board met last night, and also said that they do not include water features as part of
their calculation of park dedication.
6
Lovelace stated that in his packet to the Commission, he did not make a
recommendation due to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee and the City's
Traffic Consultant not having reviewed the plan. However, after discussing the
revised plan in depth at tonight's meeting with the Planning Commission, Lovelace
is comfortable making a recommendation for approval. The consensus of the
Commission was that they were also comfortable making a recommendation at
tonight's meeting.
MOTION: Commissioner Churchill moved, seconded by Duff, to approve the
proposed subdivision of 25.3 acres to allow for mixed use development according to
the master plan submitted to the Planning Commission dated April 21, 2004, and
subject to final preparation of a plat. The motion passed 5-0.
MOTION: Commissioner Churchill moved, seconded by Duff, to approve site
plan building permit authorization of two (2) commercial buildings to be located
between Fortino Street and 153rd Street West, and located on either side of Fresco
Terrace, subject to the conditions outlined in staff s report.
OTHER BUSINESS
None.
8. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Commissioner Churchill moved, seconded by Duff, to adjourn the meeting at
8:36 p.m.