HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/06/2005CITY OF APPLE VALLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
APRIL 6, 2005
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: Kazen Edgeton, Jeannine Churchill, Jim Hadley, Thomas Helgeson, Tom
Melander and Tim Burke
Members Absent: David Schindler
Staff Present: City Planner Tom Lovelace, City Attorney Sharon Hills, Associate City
Planner Kathy Bodmer, Associate City Planner Mazgazet Dykes and Assistant City Engineer
Colin Manson
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 Churchill moved, seconded by Hadley, to approve the Agenda.
The motion carried 6-0.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MARCH 16, 200$
Chair Edgeton asked if there were any changes to the minutes. There being none, she called
for its approval.
MOTION: Commissioner Burke moved, seconded by Churchill, to approve the minutes of
the Mazch 16, 2005, meeting. The motion carried 5-0, with Commissioner Helgeson
abstaining.
4. CONSENT ITEMS
None.
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Embry Estates - C9ngide_r Running of Northern $ of F.gigting $ $ingly_ Family
Lots from "R-1" (Single Family ResidentiaUmin. lot area 40,000 sq. ft.) to "R-2"
(Single Family ResidentiaUmin. lot area 18,000 sq. ft.) and Subdivision Into 19
Single Family Lots
Chair Edgeton opened the public hearing with the standard comments.
Associate City Planner Kathy Bodmer presented the request from The Solvoll
Corporation and 7 existing neighbors for a rezoning from "R-1" (single family,
40,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size) to "R-2" (single family, 18,000 sq. ft. minimum lot
size) on the northern 5 lots of the 8 existing lots in the development. The Solvoll
Corporation is also requesting subdivision by preliminary plat to subdivide 3 of the
existing 8 lots to create 11 new lots for a total of 191ots in the development. The
preliminary plat will also show the dedication of public street right-of--way for all of
the lots on Embry Way. All of the residents on the private portion of Embry Way
have agreed to the extension of City services, including water, sanitary sewer, storm
sewer and a public street into their neighborhood.
Bodmer reported that the eight lots in the Embry Way neighborhood were created in
the late 1960s and early 1970s. The homes were built between 1962 and 1978.
There is a shared private sewer connection for three properties on the north side of
the neighborhood. Other than that, the owners have private well and septic systems.
Embry Way is a private bituminous street with no curb and gutter which terminates
in an undersized cul-de-sac bubble.
The applicants are requesting a rezoning of the northern portion of the development
from "R-1" to "R-2". The average proposed size of all of the lots in the development
will be 46,162 sq. ft., while the average proposed size of the newly created lots will
be 31,520 sq. ft. Three of the eight current neighbors in the development wish to
further subdivide their properties. Eleven new lots would be created, resulting in a
total of 191ots in the development for a density of .8 units/acre. The developer is
requesting. a waiver from the subdivision requirements to allow the use of a shared
private driveway for Lots 6-9, Block 2. Commissioner Melander is concerned about
safety issues for Lot 6 with the shared driveway.
The site plans shows the placement of the proposed homes on the lots. A private
shared driveway is shown providing access to Lots 6-9, Block 2. Three of these lots
contain a low area that will be used for stormwater infiltration. Grading the site to
allow for individual driveways would result in significant disturbance and disruption
to the area.
Bodmer reported that because a road currently exists in the approximate location of
the new City street, minimal grading will be needed to install the street. Utilities will
be installed along the north side of the infiltration area of Lots 5-8 ,Block 2, to
minimize the depth of the sanitary sewer lines. The new lots will be custom-graded
rather than mass-graded to minimize grading and tree removal.
Construcfing Embry Way as a public street with curb and gutter will allow the
development to direct a pprYinn of the gtnrm yyatCr that e'-'~-rrCn±ly flnypg intn Pilnt
Pond back into the low retention area on Lots 5-8, Block 2.
Bodmer reported the tree preservation plan needs to be revised to show significant
deciduous trees 8" or larger. The plans show only 10" or larger deciduous trees.
Commissioner Hadley asked if 136`h Street would be connected to the new street.
Bodmer replied there are no plans to connect at this time.
Commissioner Helgeson asked Bodmer if the City would receive any more
comments from the Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District. Bodmer
stated that they will review it after the l0a` of April once the pond is thawed and
report their findings.
Chuck Ryan, representing the Solvoll Corporation, gave the Commission an
overview of the project.
Commissioner Helgeson asked what would be the benefit of the project to Lots 13,
14, and 15. Bodmer reported they would benefit by receiving City services and
public safety. Bodmer further stated that if Lots 13, 14, and 15 would want to
subdivide in the future, they would have to pay to have City services connected.
The Commission stated that this subject property has been before the City for the
past 15 years and a deal has fmally been made that the neighborhood can agree on.
The Commission thanked Ryan and City staff for their hard work in making the
project come together.
Chair Edgeton asked if anyone from the public would like to address the
Commission, and if so, they may do so at this time.
Roxanne Mikkelson, 13349 Elkwood Drive, commented that she would like to see
the residents of Embry Way temporarily park on Elkwood rather than 136th Street.
Mikkelson also asked if the trees in the right-of--way will be removed. Bodmer
stated staff will be getting revised plans on the tree plan.
Russ Matthys, 124 Chaparrel Drive, stated that he recently purchased property
behind the subject area and he is not in favor of the rezoning. Matthys suggested the
developer consider having the street continued through the Knottywoods Addition
rather than having a cul-de-sac. Bodmer explained that staff had looked at that
option on previous proposals but the property owners were not in favor of it.
Matthys was insistent that the developer consider this option. Chair Edgeton
explained to Matthys that this project has been a subject for the City for over 15
years and almost every option has been explored during that time. Edgeton stated
that the neighbors in the past did not want the road to continue. Edgeton suggested
Matthys speak with the developer privately about this matter.
Mike Kelzenberg, 13644 Pilot Knob Road, questioned why the City was able to
obtain an easement to provide access to Pilot Knob Road while in past proposals he
wag told it could not be done, The Plano Ong Commmission req'»P.Ste.l gtaff abet ,,,,,y~nre
information on required easements.
Peter Bergner, 13794 Evergreen Court, stated that he would like the view from his
home to remain the same. Bergner also questioned why the proj ect is being rezoned
to R-2 and if the R-2 properties could be subdivided again at some point in the
future. Edgeton stated that the rezoning to R-2 is what the developer is requesting
and that the parcels that are R-2 probably cannot be subdivided because there is not
enough frontage on the property. Bergner stated that he is opposed to the rezoning.
Sandy Ostrem, 13640 Embry Way, stated that she is pleased as to how this proposal
has come together. While she appreciates the concems voiced from the surrounding
neighbors, she is very pleased with the proposal presented tonight and feels that it is
of benefit to the entire neighborhood.
Jenniene Moore, 13473 Ellsworth Court, stated that she is concerned about the safety
and noise due to the increase of traffic at the intersection of Embry Way and Pilot
Knob Road. Moore also wanted to know why the loop drive didn't work in the
proposal presented a couple of years ago. Chair Edgeton requested staff review the
proposal previously presented and that staff see if anything can be done to address
traffic and safety issues.
Chair Edgeton closed the public hearing with the standard comments. Chair Edgeton
asked if anyone from the public would like to address the Cornrnission, and if so,
they may do so at this time.
Bodmer stated that staff will address the concerns bought forth at tonight's meeting.
B. Wal-Mart CUP Amendment -Consider an Amendment to an Existing
Conditional Use Permit to Allow for Display and Sales of Propane Tanks in the
Outdoor Garden Center
Chair Edgeton opened the public hearing with the standard comments.
City Planner Tom Lovelace presented the request from Wal-Mart for an amendment
to an existing conditional use permit (CUP) to allow for the display and storage of
individual propane tanks used for outdoor gas grill, in the existing permanent garden
center. Currently, only goods and products related to gardening and/or landscaping
are allowed to be displayed in the. garden center, making it necessary to amend the
existing CUP for the outdoor garden center to include propane tanks.
Lovelace stated the applicant is proposing to locate the propane tanks in the northeast
corner of the garden center adjacent to a door that will provide for convenient pick-
up.
Lovelace reported that the following conditions would be included in the
amendment:
T ... fl.. 'tl.;., tl.e ~,7,.,.,. ~ a t ,7 ~,.
- Faxiui~:... vvr Ziea wluiui ui~. vu~uvui garden center uevo~eu w
propane tank display and storage.
• The propane tanks should be stored in locked steel-mesh cages that
are suitably anchored-to the ground.
• Propane tank exchanges should be conducted in the outdoor gazden
center area by a Wal-Mart staff person.
• "No Smoking" signage should be within the gazden center as per the
direction of the City's Fire Marshal.
Chair Edgeton stated that she would like a condition added that the City be contacted
when there is a new management change at Wal-Mart so they can be informed of the
CUP and the conditions, and also that a maximum floor azea of 100 sq. ft. be added.
Commissioner Melander asked if there is a time limit as to what months the garden
center is opened. Lovelace explained that this is Wal-Mart's permanent outdoor
gazden center and not the seasonal gazden center.
Commissioner Churchill asked if the area would be screened from hazardous
weather, such as lightening. Lovelace responded that he will address that concern
with the City's Fire Marshal. Commissioner Hadley questioned the logistics of the
propane tanks and advised that they be located close to the cashier area. Hadley
recommended that the City's Fire Marshall review the location of the tanks in
relation to the cashier.
Dave Selgren, Land Use Counsel for Wal-Mart, stated that they aze willing to
comply with the recommendations of the Commission and staff.
Chair Edgeton asked if anyone from the public would like to address the
Commission, and if so, they may do so at this time. No public comments were
received. Chair Edgeton closed the public hearing with the standard remazks.
Lovelace reported that staffwill continue reviewing the issues brought forth by the
Commission.
C. Zoning Code Amendments -Consider 5 Amendments to the Zoning Code
Ordinance
Chair Edgeton opened the public hearing with the standazd remarks.
Associate City Planner Mazgazet Dykes presented five proposed zoning
amendments: Home occupations, non-conforming uses, building mechanicals,
downtown design guidelines, and site lighting.
The Commission was not supportive of the zoning amendment for home
occupations. Commissioner Churchill felt the below listed sections were too
restrictive, unfair, and impossible to oversee:
= Section i55.36i (n) (i) that stales: vniy persons residing in the
premises shall be engaged in such occupation.
• Section 155.361 (B) (5) that states: No home occupation shall be
conducted in any accessory building, including attached or detached
garages. Accessory buildings shall not be used for the storage or
fabrication of inventory or of items to be sold.
Section 155.361 (B) (8) that states: No more than three (3) vehicles
used by customers/clients may be parked at the residence, and the
parking spaces shall be located off the street on a paved parking
surface no larger than would normally be expected for purely
residential uses.
Other Commissioners concurred with Churchill and determined the proposed
amendment to home occupations should be further revised. Chair Edgeton asked if
anyone from the public would like to address the Commission, and if so, they may
do so at this time. No public comments were received. Chair Edgeton closed the
public hearing with the standard remarks.
It is the policy of the Planning Commission not to act on an item the same night as
its public hearing. However, since no adverse comments were received from the
public and the Planning Commission did not have any outstanding issues with four
of the five proposed ordinances, staff recommended approval of the zoning
amendments with the exception of home occupafions.
MOTION: Commissioner Churchill moved, seconded by Melander, to approve the
zoning amendments for non-conforming uses, building mechanicals, downtown
design guidelines, and site lighting. The motion carried 6-0.
6. LAND USE/ACTION ITEMS
A. Legacy of Apple Valley Shops -Site Plan/Building Permit Authorization to
Allow Construction of a 44,000 sq. ft. Two-story Commercial Building on a 1.1
Acre Lot
Associate City Planner Mazgazet Dykes presented the request from Legacy
Holdings-AV, LLC, for site plan building permit authorization for an approximately
44,800 sq. ft. mixed use commercial building to be located on the southeast corner of
Galaxie Avenue and 153rd Street West. The subject site is part of The Legacy of
Apple Valley commercial phase.
Dykes reported the site plan shows one, two-story multi-use building of
approximately 44,800 sq. ft. that will be a mix of retail and general office uses. The
retail uses will be located on the first floor and tota125,550 g.s.f. The offices uses
will be located on the second floor and total 19,250 g.s.f. The building is "L" shaped
and turns the comer of Galaxie Avenue and 153'a Street West. The building is
double-loaded as required by the Central Village Plan. The plans show the building
.~ Set back 16°iQ avv°t from *u e West prvpeia`y' iliac aiad i2 feet fur uae raviua prvpeaiy
line. Dykes stated that the building should be set back 15 feet from the west property
line and 10 feet from the north property line.
Dykes reported the building has a pedestrian walkway through its center. Staff
believes the applicant should grant an easement to the City that would retain public
access to this walkway during normal operafing hours.
A trash enclosure is located on the east side of the building adjacent to the parking
lot but the plan does not indicate where the garbage trucks will be located during
trash pickup nor has the applicant stated when trash.pickup will occur. In addition,
there is no loading area or designated parking spaces delineated on the plan.
The elevations show that the building will be a mix of brick and stucco. There is not
much movement to the building, but with an undulating roof line and the mix of
materials, the building does have good visual interest. Tower structures are located
where the building turns the street comer which creates a strong architectural
element. The elevations comply with the Central Village Area requirements.
The plan shows a 79-space underground garage that is gated and is to be used
exclusively for tenants of the second-story offices, and possibly some of the owners
of the retail spaces. The garage is 10 feet in depth and there are two 6-foot retaining
walls on the north and south sides of the garage entrance drive. The driveway
entering the garage has a 12% slope.
The total number of parking spaces available to the entire Legacy commercial area,
including surface, garage and on-street is 380 spaces. A shared parking model shows
there will be a peak demand of 391 parking spaces during weekday lunchtime,
approximately 11:30 - 1:30 pm. According to the submitted parking model, the
subject site will have sufficient parking at other fimes.
The City Engineer has reviewed the plan and has several outstanding issues most of
which can be easily remedied, however, the grading plan does not specify if sheet
piling or some other bracing is necessary for the excavation of the underground
garage. Dykes reported this information is necessary for staff to fully analyze the
requested site plan authorization.
The Commission questioned why the building is only 2 stories. They understood
that the Central Village Plan called fora 3 story building on the proposed site. Frank
James, representing the applicant, stated that there would be other 3 story buildings
in the Plan but the Plan does not specifically say that this particular site has to be 3
stories.
Dykes reported that at this time, staff is uncomfortable giving a recommendation to
the Planning Commission. Staff believes a more thorough analysis if necessary in
order for the Commission to make a recommendation.
B. Eastwood Ridge 2°d Addition -Consider Rezoning from "R-1" (Single Family
ResidentiaU40,000 sq. ft. lots) to "R-2" (Single Family ResidentiaU18,000 sq. ft.
lots) and "R-3" (Single Family ResidentiaU11,000 sq. ft. lots) and Subdivision of
a 10.5 Acre Parcel into 21 Single Family Residential Lots
City Planner Tom Lovelace presented the request from Deidrich Builders, Inc., and
Leonard Giannetti, for a rezoning form "R-1" (Single family residentiaUmin. lot area
40,000 sq. ft.) to "R-2" (Single family residentiaUmin. lot area 18,000 sq. ft.) and "R-
3" (Single family residentiaUmin. lot area of 11,000 sq. ft.) and subdivision of 10.49
acre site into 21 single family residential lots. The applicant is also requesting front
yard setback variances on Lots 7 and 18, a variance from the maximum allowed
street grade for Garrett Court, and a variance from the local street right-of--way width
for Garrett Court.
A public hearing for this item was held on February 16, 2005. Lovelace provided a
written copy to the Planning Commission of the comments received during the
hearing along with staff's response.
Lovelace reported the subdivision request calls for the platting of the east 5.27 acres
into 10 single family lots ranging in size from 18,001 to 25,952 sq. ft., with 8 of the
l O lots having an area near 18,000 sq. ft. Sixty feet (60') ofright-of--way for a public
street with a cul-de-sac design that would intersect with existing Galaxie Avenue
would be platted as part of the subdivision request. The west 5.22 acres-will be
platted into 11 single family lots ranging in size from 11,664 to 28,638 sq. ft. The
proposed public street to serve the most westerly 11 lots will have a street right-of-
way width of 50 feet which will extend existing Garrett Avenue from the south and
terminate into a cul-de-sac. A small gap of land 5 to 8 feet wide located between the
east lot lines of hots 13 and 14 and existing Galaxie Avenue will beplatted asright-
of-way for Galaxie Avenue.
The applicant is requesting 3 variances. The first variance request is to allow for a
reduced front yard setback of 10 feet to allow for dwelling unit on Lots 4 and 8 to be
constructed 20 feet from the front property line instead of the minimum required 30
feet. The second variance request is to allow fora 2% increase from the 8%
maximum street grade for the east/west section of Garrett Court. The third variance
request is to allow fora 10 foot reduction in the required local street right-of--way
width of 60 feet for Garrett Court. Lovelace stated that is it staff's opinion that the
right-of--way should remain 60 feet. Bill Diedrich, the applicant, stated that this is a
tough site to develop due to the topography and the existing terrain. Staff's opinion
is that even though the site is difficult to grade, the applicant should still be able to
maintain the 60 feet
The applicant's plan does not show any sidewalks. Lovelace reported that staff is
recommending that sidewalks be installed on both Garrett Avenue and 128a` Street.
Lovelace reported that the applicant submitted revised plans that include changes to
the log configuration and sizes, and right-of--way width on the preliminary plat,
location of infiltration areas, modifications to storm sewer and watermain lines,
revisions to grading contours on the grading plan, and revisions to the tree counts on
the tree preservation plan. Commissioner Hadley asked if more trees could be saved
by rezoning the western side of the parcel to R-2 instead of R-3. Lovelace stated that
he doesn't think there would be any tree savings by rezoning the westem side to R-3.
Commissioner Churchill stated that she is concerned about water drainage on the
west side of the property. City Engineer Colin Manson stated that the water will not
actually leave the platted-site and that the site would be self-contained when it comes
to grading. The western half of the site should in up in the pond that will be created.
While discussing the project with the Commission, Diedrich indicated that there will
be 10 ft. and 16 ft. retaining walls. The retaining walls were not shown on the plans
reviewed by staff. In addition, Manson stated that he was not awaze of any retaining
walls since they were not indicated on the plans. Manson was not comfortable
making a recommendation as to how the retaining walls might affect drainage. Staff
and the Planning Commission agreed that this is a critical piece of information that is
missing, especially as it relates to water drainage on the property. The consensus of
the Commission was that they could not make a recommendation on the project
considering they were missing critical pazts of the plan.
Lovelace stated that the applicant may possibly not meet the application deadline for
the approval process if this proposal is not voted on tonight. The applicant has
already been granted a 60-day extension. Staff discussed various options that might
be available to the applicant in order to keep the project moving forward and staying
within the approval process deadline. After reviewing the meeting schedule for the
Planning Commission and City Council, staff determined that this item could be
placed on the Apri120th Planning Commission and the City Council would have 2
additional meetings to review the plan within the deadline.
MOTION: Commissioner Churchill moved, seconded by Melander, to continue
discussion of this Agenda item at the next Planning Commission Meeting. The
motion carried 6-0.
C. Harmony Commons Land Exchange
City Planner Tom Lovelace reported that the owners of Harmony Commons
development are requesting a land exchange with the City of Apple Valley. The
Planning Commission needs to determine if the proposed exchange is in compliance
with the land use guide plan for the City of Apple Valley.
Lovelace reported the exchange involves the City owned storm sewer pond located
apprgXlmatelV $QQ ft, south of 1 $3~ Ctreet hetyyeen C_'.,arrett and (~alaxie [a vn~nygg,
The developer would acquire the land near Galaxie Avenue (Pazcel A). The City
would acquire the property near Garrett Avenue (Pazcel B). The City currently owns
8 acres and would own 8 acres if the land exchange is made.
If the exchange is made, the pond would be reconfigured onto a two cell pond as
indicated in the Central Village Small Area Plan. Parcel A would be filled to create
a buildable azea, while Parcel B would be excavated to create additional ponding.
The existing pond would also be deepened to create a permanent water body as well
as additional water storage and infiltration capability. All construction costs would
be assumed by the developer.
Lovelace stated the developer would like to create a commercial azea on the land to
be acquired from the City. This land use is in conformance with the Central Village
Small Area Plan as adopted by the City.
Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission agree that the proposed land
use is in conformance with the land use guide plan for the City of Apple Valley and
that the Commission recommend approval of the land exchange to the City Council.
Commissioner Helgeson questioned the value of the swap. He feels that the property
the City owns is worth a lot more than the part owned by Harmony Commons.
Lovelace stated that the City has looked at the value of the property and determined
that it is a good deal for the City. Chair Edgeton fiirther elaborated that this land
swap is part of the overall Central Village Small Area Plan. Commissioner Churchill
stated that value is not an issue in regards to the swap. Churchill stated that the is in
favor of the swap and that the swap will give the residents to the south more of a
landscape feature.
MOTION: Commissioner Churchill moved, seconded by Hadley, to recommend
approval of the land exchange between Harmony Commons and the City of Apple
Valley, and that the Chair of the Planning Commission be authorized to sign said
Resolufion. The motion carried 6-0.
OTHER BUSINESS
A. Discussion of an Amendment to "I-1" (Limited Industrial) Zoning District
Commissioner Melander recused himself from this Agenda item.
Associate City Planner Mazgazet Dykes reported that Dick's Valley Service, located
at 6885 146th Street West, is currently for sale. The property is zoned "I-1" (Limited
Industrial), which allows for heavier commercial and industrial uses such as an
automobile shop. A representafive of the property owner approached the City with a
proposal to amend the zoning ordinance to allow for limited automobile sales in the
zoning district. The potential buyer for the property would like to use the site for
automobile repairs but in addition, would like to sell reconditioned autos from the
Slte. The ('1ty'~ 2pntn code et~trentl (1nPR not allnw for atltnmphile calec in the "T_
--g Y -- ~- ---- ---_ ..
1"zoning district.
Staff requested input from the Planning Commission as to whether or not to amend
the "I-1" zoning district to allow for automobile sales, and if so, how should they be
to
regulated, i.e., as a permitted use, an accessory use, or a conditional use. In addition,
if automobile s for sale are permitted, should they be displayed or screened.
Chair Edgeton stated that she doesn't like the idea of amending an ordinance for the
benefit of one property. Commissioner Helgeson stated that he doesn't see the
benefit of someone selling a few cars in conjunction with an automobile repair shop.
Commissioner Churchill stated that the language found in Section 155.203 (C) could
be interpreted that automobile sales are already a permitted use. Churchill also does
not see a problem with allowing reconditioned automobile sales in conjunction with
an automobile repair service. City Attorney Sharon Hills stated that the definition of
open sales lot as written in the ordinance would require a conditional use permit.
Hills added that as the ordinance is written now, the sale of vehicles is not the
primary use but accessory to the primary use.
Dykes stated that staff will review the code more in depth with the City Attorney
before bringing this item back to the Planning Commission.
8 ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Commissioner Hadley moved, seconded by Helgeson, to adjourn the meeting at
11:00 p.m.
11