Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/19/2007CITY OF APPLE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 19, 2007 1. CALL TO ORDER The City of Apple Valley Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chair Jeannine Churchill at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Jeannine Churchill, Tom Melander, Thomas Helgeson, David Schindler, Frank Blundetto, Tim Burke Members Absent: Keith Diekmann Staff Present: Community Development Director Bruce Nordquist, City Planner Tom Lovelace, Associate City Planner Margaret Dykes, Associate City Planner Kathy Bodmer, City Attorney Sharon Hills, Assistant City Engineer David Bennett and Department Assistant Barbara Wolff 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Chair Churchill asked if there were any changes to the agenda. There being none, she called for approval of the agenda. MOTION: Commissioner Helgeson moved, seconded by Commissioner Burke to approve the agenda. The motion carried 6-0. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 5, 2007 Chair Churchill asked if there were any changes to the minutes. There being none, she called for approval of the minutes. MOTION: Commissioner Helgeson moved, seconded by Commissioner Burke, to recommend approval of the minutes of the September 5, 2007, meeting. The motion carried 6-0. 4. 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE/ACTIONS Community Development Director Bruce Nordquist stated that Hoisington Koegler Group, Inc. is close to launching a web page for the 2030 Comp Plan update on the City's website with an approximate date of one week. There will be a link for public information and also a link to a public input survey on the City's website. Nordquist announced that there will be a work session conducted with the Planning Commission, Planning Staff and Hoisington Koegler Group, Inc. on Wednesday, October 3, 2007 in the McIntosh Conference Room from 5:30 p.m. to 6:50 p.m. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS S:\planningV'LANCOMM\2007 agenda & minutes\091907m.doc A. The Valley Office Park -Subdivision of land by plat that will create five lots for industrial uses and site plan building permit authorization to allow for construction of two 3-story 60,000 sq. ft. office buildings, two 28,000 sq. ft. office/showroom buildings and one 78,400 sq. ft. office/warehouse building. City Planner Tom Lovelace stated that the petitioner is requesting approval of a subdivision by plat to create 5 lots varying in size from 2.7 acres to 8 acres and site plan/building permit authorization to allow for construction of two 3-story 60,000 sq. ft. office buildings, two 28,000 sq. ft. office/showroom buildings, and one 78,400 sq. ft. office/warehouse building. The 27.2-acre site is located at the northeast corner of 147`h Street West and Flagstaff Avenue. Access to the site will be via the extension of 147th Street West. The site is approximately 25 feet higher than the existing grade of 147`h Street West at Flagstaff Avenue. The extension of 147`h Street will require significant grading. This property was part of the City's recent Industrial Land Use Study and on June 14, 2007, the City Council approved a resolution to submit a request to the Metropolitan Council for re-designation of this property from Mixed Use to Industrial. This request would be in conformance with the proposed Land Use Map re-designation. Lovelace expects response with re-designation from the Metropolitan Council by the first part of October. The property is currently zoned General Industrial and the proposed uses appear to be consistent with the uses permitted by ordinance. The property is currently platted as an outlot, and the petitioner is proposing the platting of the property into 5 lots. Utility and drainage easements should also be placed along all interior lot lines. The petitioner has identified two ponding areas and two infiltration areas. Utility and drainage easements should be placed over these areas. The City will also require that conservation easements be placed over these areas that will ensure that no alterations will occur without city consent. Access to the site will be via two private drive connections from proposed 147th Street West. Because the most westerly private drive will serve multiple lots and is the location of several public utilities, the City would like to investigate the possibility of dedicating the most westerly private drive as a public street. 147x' Street West, a public collector street, will be extended east from existing Flagstaff Avenue, terminating at the east property line of the subject property. A temporary turnaround will need to be constructed at the end of this street. The elevations for the three building types indicate the use ofbrick, textured pre-cast panel and pre- finished metal. It appears that the proposed elevations are consistent with the existing buildings in the business park and are in compliance with city code. However, the petitioner has provided only front elevations for the proposed buildings. Elevations for all four sides of each building shall be submitted for review prior to any recommendation by staff. The submitted plans do not identify the locations of any of the building's mechanical systems or trash enclosures. All systems will need to be properly screened in accordance with city code and all S:\planning\pLANCOMM\2007 agenda & minutes\091907mdoc exterior trash enclosures would need to be constructed of the same materials as the proposed buildings. The sidewalk in front of the building on Lot 1 should be extended south and will connect with the sidewalk/pathway along the north side of proposed 147th Street West. Dakota County has indicated that they might have interest in constructing a leg of the South Urban Regional Trail along the east line of the subject property. If that is the case, the petitioner would need to dedicate a trail easement for that purpose. City code requires that the minimum cost of landscaping materials for industrial projects shall be 1'/z of the estimated building construction cost based on Means construction data. A detailed planting price list shall be required for verification of the City's 1 %2 % landscaping requirement at the time of submission of plans for a building permit. Commissioner Blundetto asked if the pipelines would need to be moved. Assistant City Engineer David Bennett answered that yes, they need to be lowered. Commissioner Burke asked about the anticipated site line from the back of the buildings with regards to the high school and city park. Lovelace stated that the elevation is high and that from the high school, a person would be looking up at this office park. There also would be two loading docks at the rear of the two buildings. Commissioner Melander inquired about delivery trucks moving through the private street. Lovelace answered that the Traffic Consultant looked at the plans and had no major issues with traffic maneuvering through the lot, although the Petitioner can expand on that. Petitioner Chris Garda of Westwood Professional Services, project manager on this development, stepped forward. At this point the petitioner is not sure if the center of the traffic circle will be paved or a landscaping area, although it would be a different colored paved area for the trucks to maneuver through. Garda stated that the only issue they're working on right now is making the center access drive a public street or an easement with a public access. The petitioner is working with Staff to resolve this issue. There are no major issues otherwise. Chair Churchill commented that it was nice to see a plan for this area. Chair Churchill, hearing no fiirtluer public comments, closed the public hearing with the standard comments. 6. ACTION ITEMS A. Regent Senior Building -Consideration of amendments to the zoning ordinance "PD-716" to allow for an increase in the height of senior-only apartment S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2007 agenda & minutes\091907m.doc building from 55 ft. to 65 ft.; decrease the required parking from 1.1 parking spaces/unit to 1.0 parking spaces/unit; and increase in density from 54 to 55 units/acre; and site plan/building permit authorization for 134 unit building. Associate Planner Margaret Dykes stated that the petitioner is requesting an amendment to "PD-716, Zone 2" for the following actions: a. Increase the height of senior-only apar(ment building from 55 feet to 65 feet; b. Increase in density from 54 to 55 units per acre; and c. Decrease the parking requirement for senior-only apartments from 1.1 space/unit to 1.0 space/unit. 2. Site Plan Review and Building Permit Authorization fora 134-unit senior-only rental apartment building. The plans show a 65'-tall tower feature at the main entrance to the building. The rest of the building measures 55' from grade. The building height increase is requested for the tower feature. One of the goals of the Central Village was to create apedestrian-oriented development that had a unique "sense of place". The tower feature helps to create a more urban feel to the building and adds visual interest to the Central Village. Staff believes the zoning amendment is appropriate provided only a small portion of any building face exceed 55' in height. Dykes stated that at the public hearing held September 5, 2007, members of the public stated they were comfortable with the amendment, provided it only applied to the tower feature. The tower is 24' wide; the east/west building elevation is 416' feet wide. The tower comprises about 6% of the face of the building. The ordinance could be amended so that not more than 6% of any building elevation measures 65' from grade. The applicant is requesting an increase in the maximum density from 54 to 55 units per acre. The Central Village Plan allows high-density residential uses provided such developments offer amenities such as private outdoor space as related to private indoor space, connection to green spaces and the Downtown. The proposed building plans show that each unit will have an approximately 5' deck that offers private space for each unit. It is staff s opinion that the private space justifies the increased density and the zoning amendment is justified. Dykes stated that no concerns were expressed at the public hearing regarding the requested increase in density. The site plan shows 129 parking spaces plus 5 surface proof-of-parking spaces for a total of 134 spaces. Of these, 85 are in the garage and 44 aze surface spaces (49 surface spaces including the 5 proof-of-parking spaces). This totals 1 space per unit. The zoning ordinance requires 1.1 spaces for senior apartment buildings, or 147 spaces. Given that the population that will occupy the building tend to have fewer vehicles, staff believes the 134 pazking spaces will be sufficient parking for all residents, staff, and guests. Dykes stated that Staff has found that at other independent living apartment buildings in the Twin Cities, a parking ratio of 1 space per unit is generally acceptable. The City of Burnsville and the City of Lakeville require 1 parking space per unit for senior housing. The City of Rosemount requires 0.5 spaces per unit. Senior-only apartment buildings in Apple Valley have required parking ratios ranging from 0.53 spaces per unit to 1.13 spaces per unit. Apple Villa now called Augustana Health 5:\planningV'LANCOMM\2007 agenda & minutes\091907mdoc Cue Center required 0.53 spaces per unit, or 125 spaces. Of these, 56 are surface spaces and 69 are garage spaces. Orchard Square required 1.13 spaces per unit, or 124 spaces. Of these, 48 are surface spaces and 76 are garage spaces. The Timbers project required 1 space per unit plus 1 space per unit inproof-of-parking, or 106 spaces to be constructed and 106 spaces as proof-of-parking. The site actually has 64 spaces. A "windshield survey" on various days at various times found that The Timbers and Orchard Square sites have a significant number of surface parking spaces unoccupied. Orchard Square had 35-42 surface spaces unoccupied on various days, and The Timbers had 50-59 surface spaces unoccupied. Augustana Health Care Center had very few spaces unoccupied. It appears that for general day-to- dayuse, 1 parking space per unit is sufficient for senior-only apartments and health care centers. The applicant states that of the 134 units, approximately 90 will be "independent living" units,. and 44 will be "assisted living". The independent living units ue for those residents that will not rely heavily on care services provided. It is staff s opinion that the 90 independent living units in the proposed building should have 1.1 parking spaces per unit, or 99 spaces, to accommodate any health care staff needed for these residents. The 44 assisted living units aze for residents that require additional care, but are less likely to own cars. Some on-site nursing, kitchen, and administrative staff are necessary for these units. A survey of other assisted living developments in the Twin Cities found that similar sized projects tend to have around 20 staff on-site to help residents with their needs. A parking ratio of 0.5-0.8/unit tends to be sufficient for these types of units. It appears that a 0.8 space per unit would accommodate both assisted living residents and staff needed to care for those residents. This totals 35 parking spaces. Staff believes that the parking ratio should be 1.1 spaces/independent living unit and 0.8 space/ assisted living unit. This totals 134 parking spaces. It is staff's opinion that the proposed plan has sufficient parking for all residents, staff, and guests, provided the proof-of-parking spaces are constructed at the same time as the rest of the parking lot. The plan shows 6 handicapped puking spaces. The building code requires the number of handicapped puking spaces equal 2% of the total number of spaces. The site is required to have 3 handicapped spaces. At the public hearing held September 5, 2007, there were concerns raised about the requested reduction in parking. Residents stated that puking in the Central Village is already limited and the requested reduction in puking on the Regent site may exacerbate the limited puking. It is staff's opinion that the zoning amendment for a decrease in parking spaces for the building is justified. Commissioner Helgeson inquired about the handicapped spaces and the fact that they aze doubled from what is required. Is Staff comfortable with this number? Dykes stated that the Building Official and Staff ue comfortable with the amount of handicapped spaces. This should be sufficient. S:\planningV'LANCOMM\2007 agenda & minutes\091907m.doc 5 Petitioner Frank Janes of Hartford Group, Inc. stepped forward for any questions from the Planning Commission. Chair Churchill commented that this plan is much improved from the first proposal. Janes replied that they are pleased with the project and ready to get into the ground before winter and the construction period is expected to be approximately 12-15 months. Chair Churchill, hearing no further issues, called for a motion. MOTION: Commissioner Burke moved, seconded by Commissioner Melander to approve amendment to "PD-716/Zone 2", subject to the execution of a Planned Development Agreement to be recorded at Dakota County with the plat of the Legacy of Apple Valley that limits the use of the site to senior-only apartments, and dedicates drainage and utility easements over existing City infrastructure and along all property boundaries, including the following: 1. An increase in the height of senior-only apartment buildings from 55 ft. to 65 ft. for architectural features such as towers, provided not more than 6% of any building face exceed 55 ft., 2. An increase in density from 54 to 55 units per acre subject to the construction of 5 ft. wide decks on each unit, 3. A decrease in the parking requirement for senior-only apartments from 1.1 space/unit to 1.0 space/unit; And site plan review and building permit authorization fora 134-unit senior only apartment building as shown on the site plans received in City offices on August 24, 2007, and August 29, 2007 subject to all applicable City Codes and standards, and the following conditions: 1. No building permit shall be issued until a Natural Resources Management Permit has been approved by City Council. As part of the NRMP, a traffic control plan for site grading shall be submitted, reviewed and approved by the Public Works Director and City Engineer. Also, an erosion control plan for any stockpiled material shall be art of the NRMP, 2. The developer shall post a fmancial security to the satisfaction of the City to ensure that the City has the means to repair or replace any City infrastructure damaged by the excavation or construction of the proposed building and garage, 3. Any City trail or park infrastructure shall be relocated to abutting City property according to the approved site plan at the expense of the developer, 4. All surface parking spaces shall be screened with a minimum 3.5 ft. masonry wall or vegetation that provides year-round screening. Any retaining walls shall not be located in drainage and utility easements, 5. All retaining walls shall be designed by a registered structural engineer and the designs shall be reviewed and approved by City staff prior to issuance of a building permit, 6. The landscape plan shall be modified to address the comments of the Natural Resources Coordinator's memo dated August 31, 2007, and the applicant shall submit a nursery bid list that confirms the landscape materials, imgation system, decorative paving and other common area amenities meet or exceed 2 % %of the value of the construction of the building based on Means Construction Data. An irrigation plan shall be part of this submission, 7. There shall be a minimum of 47 surface parking spaces and 87 garage parking spaces, 8. An emergency vehicle access plan for the sub-grade garage shall be submitted for review and approval by City staff prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, 9. All rooftop and/or exterior mechanicals shall be adequately screened to comply with City code, 10. All masonry building materials shall be integrally colored and shall not be painted. Colors of all S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2007 agenda & minutes\091907m.doc materials and method ofapplication/pigmentation must be clearly marked on plans submitted for building permit application. The motion carried 6-0. B. Oakwood Hills Addition -consider proposed subdivision of three existing single-family lots totaling 5.7 acres into 16single-family lots. Associate Planner Margaret Dykes stated that the petitioner is requesting a proposed subdivision of 3 existing parcels totaling 5.71 acres into 16 single family lots. The proposal is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan, and complies with the zoning requirements. All lots front a public road as is required by City Code. The preliminary plat shows the dedication of all necessary right-of- way and all necessary drainage and utility easements. The lot sizes range from 11,040 sq. ft. to 19,242 sq. ft. The average lot area is 13,447 sq. ft. The lot areas are similar to those in surrounding developments to the north, south and west. The lots in these areas range from 11,050 sq. ft. to 19,135 sq. ft. The plan shows sidewalks along Georgia Drive and on 132nd Street West as is required by City policy. A 60' wide, 450' long cul-de-sac aligning with Galleria Place is shown on the plan. The proposed cul-de-sac complies with all City standards. The development is expected to generate approximately 160 vehicle trips per day. Staff believes the proposal will not significantly add to surrounding traffic nor will it significantly change existing traffic patterns. A stonnwater pond and a rain garden are shown on the site to provide infiltration for the first %2" of any rainfall event. The applicant has submitted a revised site plan that shows some modificafions that address the concerns raised by the City Engineer. The plan shows potential building pads, which meet the required setbacks. It should be noted that these are potential building sites, and that the houses constructed will not necessarily be the exact dimensions as the building pads. The subject site has significant grades which will require large amounts of fill material to be brought into the site. The applicant estimates approximately 20,000 cubic yards of fill material necessary. A number of significant trees will be lost because of the grading that will occur. The tree removal plan shows that the site contains 329 (4,616 caliper inches) significant trees (trees over 8" in diameter). The tree removal plan shows that 185 (2,776 caliper inches) of the significant trees will be removed during the mass grading of the site; this is a loss of approximately 56 %. This number includes the trees located in the proposed building pads and the required stormwater infiltration areas. The developer will need to plant 278 caliper inches or 111 trees 2.5" in diameter. The City generally encourages at least 50% or more of the significant trees on a site to be saved, though this may be modified if special circumstances exist. Many of the trees being removed are boxelder, red pine and aspen. These trees have shallow root systems and are short-lived. Because of these attributes, these trees can be easily uprooted during high winds and are not ideal when located adjacent to houses. Staff does not believe that additional trees can be saved on the site because of the location of the proposed cul-de-sac, and the amount of fill that must be brought into the site. Jeff Kehrer, Natural Resources Coordinator, is comfortable with the tree removal. The development will be required to dedicate park land or provide cash-in-lieu of land, which will be calculated at the time of final plat. S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2007 agenda & minutes\091907m.doc Commissioner Helgeson stated that with the large amount of fill being brought in, that would be a lot of trucks coming through. He inquired as to any thought of the impact on the roads, pedestrian safety, etc. Dykes replied that it will need to be outlined in the petitioner's Natural Resources Plan. It will require staging routes in and out of the site, and limited hours with no weekend hours for hauling fill. Petitioner Nathan Jones of Premier Development of the Twin Cities stepped forward for comment. Jones is comfortable with all of the recommendations set forth by Staff. Chair Churchill, hearing no fiirther issues, called for a motion. MOTION: Commissioner Helgeson moved, seconded by Commissioner Schindler to approve a subdivision of 5.71 acres into 16 single family lots as shown on the proposed preliminary plat of Oakwood Hills, received in City offices on September 11, 2007, subject to all applicable City Codes and standazds and the following conditions: 1. The final plat for Oakwood Hills shall dedicate right-of--way for 132nd Street West. All property owners shall be signatories to final plat, 2. Five foot wide sidewalk shall be installed along Georgia Drive, 3. Any damage by the developer to existing City sidewalks on 132nd Street West shall be repaired to City satisfaction, 4. The applicant and future owners shall pay park dedication fees based on the uniform land valuation in place at the time of final plat approval, 5. The applicant and future owners of the development shall apply for Natural Resources Management Permits for the mass grading of the site and for each individual lot when a building permit is requested. All NRMP requests shall correspond to the grading plan received in City offices on September 11, 2007, 6. Conservation easements shall be placed over all storrnwater ponding infrastructures, including raingardens. Such easements shall be files with the final plat, 7. The developer shall submit a tree mitigation plan at the time of final plat that shows the plating of a minimum off278 caliper inches of trees, with a minimum of one, two-inch tree per lot. The motion carried 6-0. C. Drive-Thru for Class III Restaurants -consideration of amendment to Chapter 155 of the City Code that would allow adrive-through in conjunction with a Class III Neighborhood Restaurant in the "RB" (Retail Business) zoning district. Associate Planner Kathy Bodmer stated that the City of Apple Valley, prompted from a request by Clear Choice Properties, LLC., owners of East Valley Plaza shopping center, is considering an amendment to the zoning code that would allow a Class III Neighborhood Restaurant to have adrive- thru window. The owner of East Valley Plaza would like to have adrive-thru window for a coffee shop on the southwest end of the building. The shopping center is located on the southeast corner of Pilot Knob Road and 140th Street West at 14050 Pilot Knob Road. The property is zoned Retail Business which currently has no provision for drive-thru windows in conjunction with a Class III restaurant. S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2007 agenda & minutes\091907m.doc Bodmer addressed the following questions that were received at the September 5, 2007, public hearing: 1. Concern about increased traffic at East Valley Plaza. 2. Concern that a request for adrive-thrn window will set a precedent throughout the City. 3. Concern that neighborhood shopping areas are designed to be pedestrian and bicycle oriented. If drive-thrus are permitted, it may make the area more auto-oriented and may discourage people from walking and biking in the shopping area. Bodmer responded that the primary concern raised at the hearing dealt with potential increased traffic at the East Valley Plaza shopping center. The City's Traffic Engineer, Tom Sohrweide, SEH, stated that traffic studies confirm that levels of traffic would in fact increase as a result of drive-thru windows at coffee shops. He stated that the biggest impact would be in the morning peak period. Sohrweide states that a recent study indicated that coffee shops with drive-thru windows generate 60 new vehicle trips (30 in and 30 out) per hour per 1,000 ft. of floor area over what would be generated by a coffee shop without adrive-thru window. He stated that there should be minimal impact on the nearby residential areas given the fact that most traffic will be traveling northbound and westbound in the morning peak period. The request for the drive-thm in this location may encourage similar requests for drive-thru windows at Class III restaurants in other Retail Business zoning districts in the City. The provision would apply to all properties within the Retail Business zoning district throughout the City, of which there are four locations within the City. However, the draft ordinance would make adrive-thnx window a conditional use which would require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council. The conditional use permit process will ensure that each request is evaluated on a case-by- casebasis, specific conditions will be reviewed and adj acent property owners will be notified and given an opportunity to voice any concerns or issues at a public hearing before any window maybe installed. The last issue, conflicts with pedestrian and bicycle oriented shopping centers, is an important issue to consider. The City's goal is to promote pedestrian and bicycle oriented design adjacent to residential neighborhoods. The draft ordinance specifically requires review by the City's Traffic Engineer to verify that these conflicts are minimized to ensure that pedestrians and bicycles can continue to circulate safely through the shopping center site. Staff finds that the concerns raised at the public hearing focused primarily on the East Valley Plaza shopping center site. Issues concerning amendments to the Retail Business zoning district City wide have been adequately addressed through the conditions laid out in the Conditional Use Permit requirements. More specific review of the East Valley Plaza drive-thm window request will be done when the property owner makes application for a conditional use permit. At that time the Traffic Engineer will be asked to do a thorough review of the layout to determine traffic generation and distribution resulting from the proposed window. Commissioner Melander commented that the goal of a successful retail center is to generate traffic. Chair Churchill, hearing no further issues, called for a motion. S:\p(anningV'LANCOMM\2007 agenda & minutes\091907m.doc MOTION: Commissioner Melander moved, seconded by Commissioner Burke to approve amending the City Code to allow adrive-thru window in conjunction with a Class III Neighborhood Restaurant in the Retail Business zoning district with conditions. The motion carried 6-0. C. Residential Parking Ordinance Amendments -Consideration of amendments to the City Code regarding the parking and storage of motor vehicles and trailers on residential lots. The Planning Commission last reviewed the Residential Parking Ordinance Amendments at its July 18, 2007, meeting. At that time, three final issues were discussed. However, lingering concerns over the conditions placed on the residential parking permit requirements prompted the Commission to direct staff to do further review of the ordinance before final action could be taken on it. The three items that were discussed were the following: 1. Width of residential driveways. The Planning Commission came to the conclusion that the maximum width of a residential driveway should be no more than 40 ft. 2. Paved surfaces. The Planning Commission kept the recommendation of the Urban Affairs Committee that states that all vehicles with motors and Class II trailers must be parked on a paved surface. 3. Parking permit criteria. The last item was the provision that allows a homeowner to request a pernut in order to park up to six vehicles on a residential driveway. The draft ordinance included a requirement for a site plan and stated that the City Council could require additional screening to protect adjacent properties. However, the Planning Commission was not comfortable with the proposed language. As a result, it was removed from the proposed language. Planning and Legal Staff have met and discussed the proposed parking permit requirements. The requirement that the petitioner notify adj acent property owners was removed. The provisions that required a site plan and allowed additional screening were also removed. The most significant changes to the City Code resulting from the draft ordinance are the following: 1. New definitions are established for motor vehicles, non-passenger vehicles, recreational vehicles and trailers. 2. The numbers of recreational vehicles and trailers that can be parked or stored outside are limited to one big and one small, or two small, on most residential properties. 3. All vehicles with motors, whether or not licensed for on street use, and Class II trailers, must be parked on a paved surface. 4. The maximum width of a residential driveway is limited to 40 ft. Commissioner Helgeson asked for clarification that if there is a paved surface at the rear of your home for a trailer, does this have to be connected to the driveway? Bodmer clarified that the provision only pertains to the parking penmit. Commissioner Helgeson also commented about the wording of the definition of a junk vehicle. S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2007 agenda & minutes\091907m.doc 10 Dykes answered that this is a requirement of state statute and this wording is taken directly from state statute. Commissioner Helgeson asked if the maximum width of a residential driveway was set at 40 ft. Bodmer confirmed that it was and that the City Council will give the ordinance rigorous review. Chair Churchill commented that page 3, letter b, numbers 3, 4 and 5 should contain the words passenger vehicles. Wording of page 3, letter b, number 3 was changed and confirmed with City Attorney Sharon Hills so that it now reads as, "All passenger vehicles must be parked or stored on the established paved driveway or a paved surface connected to the driveway". Chair Churchill, hearing no further issues, called for a motion. MOTION: Commissioner Burke moved, seconded by Commissioner Schindler to approve the draft Residential Parking Ordinance which amends the City's residential parking requirements in the City Code with the change of letter b, number 3 to read as "All passenger vehicles must be parked or stored on the established paved driveway or a paved surface connected to the driveway". And also changes to letter b, numbers 4 and 5 to include the words passenger vehicles. The motion carried 6- 0. Dykes outlined the tentative process that the Residential Parking Ordinance would need to go through. It will be introduced at the City Council work session on October 11, 2007. The first reading will take place at the City Council meeting on October 25, 2007. The second reading, acceptance and adoption will take place at the City Council meeting on November 8, 2007. 7. OTHER BUSINESS A. Cobblestone Lake Senior Complex -Review of a proposed 200-unit independent living/assisted living/memory care units and community center. City Planner Tom Lovelace stated the applicant is seeking comments from the Planning Commission regarding a proposed 200-unit senior living facility on approximately 5.1 acres, located south of the intersection of Cobblestone Lake Parkway and Embry Path. The project would include a 4-story independent living wing with 140 units and underground parking and a 3-story memory care/assisted living wing with 42 assisted living units and 18 memory care units. The site plan also identifies a 2-story, with full basement, 68,646 sq. ft. community center that will be located to the west and south of the senior building on 4.6 acres. This building will be connected to the senior building via a corridor and will be utilized by tenants of the building as well as residents of Cobblestone Lake. The site is currently zoned "PD-703/zone 8". It was intended that this zone would be temporary for the purpose of extracting sand and gravel deposits. When the mining was completed, the areas would become one of the other zones (zones 1 through 7) within the planned development consistent with proposed platting and development plans. Therefore, this property will need to be rezoned. The S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2007 agenda & minutes\091907m.doc 11 original Planned Development Ordinance No. 703 identified future zones, including one (zone 7), that would allow for high density town homes and apartment dwelling units at an overall density of twenty-four (24) units per acre and mixed retail business, limited business, and institutional uses. The density of this project, which is approximately 39 units per acre, is significantly greater than the maximum expected for this planned development zoning district. The project is located on three proposed outlots, which will need to be platted prior to any construction. Outlot D is the current location of a storm sewer line, which would need to be relocated if this project proceeded as proposed. The storm sewer is also located in an existing drainage and utility easement, which will need to be vacated. Outlot D was also anticipated to be dedicated for a park, which includes a pathway connection from Embry Path to Cobblestone Lake. The pathway will need to be relocated to the satisfaction of the City and developer. Surface parking lots will abut Cobblestone Lake Parkway. Proper screening ofthese lots from Cobblestone Lake Parkway will be critical. The senior building is indicating 147 garage and 60 surface pazking spaces, which is just over one space per unit. City code does not specifically address parking for this type ofmulti-family use. The petitioner has provided some background information with respect to parking for this facility in the attached letter. Further analysis will be necessary to determine adequate parking for this type of facility. The community center is indicating 123 surface parking spaces for the 68,646 sq. ft. facility. City code calculates parking at 1 space for every three occupants based on maximum occupant load of the building. The floor plans identify a variety of uses within the community center that include facilities to be used exclusively by the residents of the senior living building or residents of the Cobblestone Lake development. Because of the two distinct populations that will make use of this facility, parking for this building will likely also require further analysis. The petitioner has provided some perspective drawings which indicate the use of brick and lap siding for the exterior finish of the senior building and brick, stone, and lap siding for the community center. The materials are similar to what is currently being used for the residential buildings in the development, because of its close proximity to the Cobblestone Commercial, who used decorafive precast panels, brick, decorative concrete block, and precast stone for their exterior finishes. Because this location could be considered a transition area from residential to commercial uses, the petitioner may want to consider also using some of the decorative elements from the commercial development for their buildings. Chair Churchill asked for comments from the Petitioner. Petitioner Rob Wachholz of Tradition Development is pleased to be attempting to bring such a quality senior housing complex to Cobblestone Lake. This building provides life-cycle housing and also maximizes density issues. Tim Trimble of First Capital Commercial Services stepped forward to state that he was extremely excited for this visionary senior campus. The senior campus includes independent living, assisted S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2007 agenda & minutes\091907m.doc ] 2 living and memory care. The campus includes home health care so that residents may move through the building as their needs change. First Capital Commercial Services pioneered a wellness facility with a health club at Summit Place in Eden Prairie. This concept has been received so well that the wellness center is open to senior citizens of the city of Eden Prairie for a small membership fee. Thi: has been built into the plan for Cobblestone Lake. In addition to the residents, area businesses and community residents are able to use the facilities. Trimble stated that they are here for the long run and want to be acceptable in the community and to continuously perfect what they're doing. Ken Norby of NAI Architects, Inc. stepped forward to present the plans for the senior center. He discussed the walking path that originally came between the two buildings where the storm sewer was, but after talking to the City Engineer they have rerouted the trail and now the function actually works better. He briefly explained the community center area plans. The wellness center is located in the lower level. Some of the amenities included are lap pool, aerobics, exercise room and locker rooms. There will always be someone on staff to assist and supervise the residents. The main level includes a gaming room, community room, dry cleaning, bank, proposed drug store, bistro and kiosks that residents and community members can access. The second floor includes dining facilities for independent living patrons and a separate dining area for assisted living, craft rooms, library and a performance room for entertainment venues. The architect is attempting to enfold the community into the senior complex by combing all of the facilities in the town center. Commissioner Helgeson commented that he likes the intergenerational mixed use and the opportunities for interaction between residents and the community. The renderings are very nice and believes that this will be a quality, top-notch project. He is concerned about the density and not enthused about the location of the receiving dock. Also, Helgeson stated that he has concerns with the pathways. Previously, the Commission worked very hard to create ease of walkways and safety for the pedestrians and bicyclists for the community of Cobblestone Lake and with regards to the retail. Also, he has some concerns about the public's perception of this buildmg. He feels that the public will see this as a senior center and not a community center. Wachholz stated that they are working with Norby to create a look and feel of a community center and not a senior center. Screening will be created to block the loading docks. Regarding density, they are not even near the potential number of units that could fit on this site. Also, the scale of the building fits the area. Wachholz believes the emphasis for the trailway should be along Embiy Path. There also are sidewalks on both sides of the road throughout this development which helps disburse traffic. Commissioner Helgeson stated that to make an intended path for people to get from Point A to Point B, would be for a double path, well lit and structured so that it's very clear to people that this is a pathway. Also, his concern is mostly the path running from east to west. The community will be using the path to walk/bike to Target. The trail needs to look like it's for everyone's use, not just for the seniors' use. Commissioner Blundetto asked where the entrance to the serpentine building is and the distance to the furthermost unit. Norby answered that the entrance is accessed through the office area and the distance to the furthermost unit is approximately 600 ft. S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2007 agenda & minutes\091907m.doc 13 Trimble added that this is a similar layout and lengths of hallways that they have at Summit Place in Eden Prairie and it has worked out very well there. Commissioner Blundetto made an observation that they give strong consideration to the pathway and to listen to the comments being given by the Commission. He has no issue with density or parking. Commissioner Schindler inquired as to the area where the bulk of the people will be entering to access the park and to walk around the lake, where will the parking be? And will this parking area be used primarily for Cobblestone Lake residents or for all of Apple Valley residents? He also believes that the community center will be used by other community members, not just seniors. Also, what is the plan for the open space for the future? Wachholz answered that there will probably be angled parking on the street, although we're still working through that with the City. The facilities will serve the broader community. The open space is approximately three acres that has many options available such as retail, office/condo space, housing or medical services. Commissioner Melander commented that he visited the facility in Eden Prairie and the plan was thoughtful, well planned and provided easy access for residents. The concept is terrific and he has no problem with the density. The architecture is visually interesting. Commissioner Burke commented that he also took the tour and was very impressed and supports a trail around as opposed to between the buildings. Chair Churchill stated that she has one issue with the surface parking. It appears that there is a parking lot on the north side of the building with no public access. It appears that the trails need to be supported along the north side of the building. But, as long as they appear and are marked similar to the rest of the paths within Cobblestone Lake, this is enough to satisfy her. Trimble stated that there is more than adequate space for the residents and staff to park underground. But, this parking lot is for the residents and connects to the underground parking. Wachholz stated that he truly appreciates the comments. His number one goal is resident approval. Commissioner Schindler is interested in seeing plans on both options of a trail through the buildings and one that goes around the community center. Norby stated that he may not be able to accommodate a trailway through the buildings because he cannot meet the handicap accessibility codes. Chair Churchill, hearing no further comments, moved to the next agenda item. B. Fischer Sand and Aggregate GUAR -Discussion of draft AUAR and proposed end uses on approximately 560 acres of property that would include 252 acres of residential, 236 acres of commerciallmixed- use/neighborhood service development and 83 acres of open space. S:\planning\PI.ANCOMM\2007 agenda & minutes\091907m.doc 14 City Planner Tom Lovelace presented the Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) prepared for the Seed, Fischer and 160th Street properties, which is property owned by Fischer Sand and Aggregate, LLP and is currently or has been previously part of their sand and gravel mining operation. The AUAR encompasses approximately 443 acres of undeveloped land that is generally located south of County Road 42, east of Flagstaff Avenue, north of 160x' Street West, and west of Pilot Knob Road; and 116 acres located south of County Road 42, east of Pilot Knob Road, north of future 153~d Street West, and west of the Prairie Crossing development. Although no development proposal has been submitted by the property owner, it is expected that future development of the property within the study area could produce over 2,400 residential dwelling units and approximately 3,000,000 sq. ft. of commerciaUinstitutional uses. The likely number of residential dwelling units and square footage of commercial associated with the property would trigger the need for an environmental review as required by the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) roles. Normally, this environmental review has involved the preparation of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) and/or Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). However, the EQB rules do allow for the preparation of an AUAR as a substitute for an EAW or EIS. The AUAR process is a hybrid of the EIS and EAW processes. It uses a standard list of questions similar to the EAW process and provides a level of analysis that is comparable to an EIS. The significant feature of the AUAR process is that it provides the opportunity to review several development scenarios. The benefit of the AUAR process is that it gives the City the ability to evaluate how much development can be accommodated on the site without significant environmental impacts and helps to anticipate and correct potential problems. Although the City is the Responsible Governmental Unit, the AUAR was prepared by consultants retained by Fischer Sand and Aggregate. City staff has identified some items of concern in the AUAR that may need to be clarified prior to final acceptance by the City Council. First, the Comprehensive Plan will be updated in 2008. The AUAR will likely need to be updated when the City completes the Comprehensive Plan update or when the first project is submitted for consideration. The text should be corrected to recognize this. Additionally, Mr. Rusty Fifield, the City's consultant drafting the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update, says that the AUAR is out of sync with the process of updating the Comprehensive Plan. The 2030 Comprehensive Plan may contain land uses that are different from those shown in the AUAR. Second, though the AUAR references the Apple Valley Office/Industrial Market Potential Study, it does not take into account all of the recommendations put forth in the Study. One of the recommendations is, "Determine if the City should offer incentives to attract the types of development that they desire". However, the AUAR incorrectly references this recommendation. The Study should be attached to the AUAR to affirm the potential for office/commercial uses, including medical facilities. The AUAR evaluates only two scenarios, and neither includes office or commercial uses nor does it evaluate the other four recommendations made by the Study. Third, the City has come to realize that a balanced community has quality housing, retail, and businesses that provide high paying jobs. The loss of the mining activity reduces approximately 250 high paying jobs without replacement. Residents are already required to commute to areas outside of the county for high paying jobs. S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2007 agenda & minutes\091907m.doc 15 Fourth, determinations/conclusions are made about the highest and best use of the property without any corresponding support. The basis for the finding needs to be attached. Fifth, in approving the AUAR, the City will formally declare that "The information contained in this document is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge." Mr. Fifield believes parts of the AUAR should be clarified so that the City can make this declaration with confidence. A notice of availability was published in the August 27, 2007, issue of the EOB Monitor, which is the official organ of the EQB. A 30-day public comment period follows this publication date, which allows several public agencies, as well as the public, the opportunity to comment on the contents of the document. Also, the AUAR must be discussed at a public meeting during this 30-day period. The local RGU (Responsible Governmental Unit), which is the City of Apple Valley, is responsible for holding the public meeting. The City has designated Planning Commission meetings as the appropriate forum in which to hold the required public meeting. Based upon the comments received, the RGU will make any appropriate revisions to the document and add a mitigation plan, which will specify mitigation measures or procedures that will be taken to ensure protection of the environment from identified potential impacts. The final document and mitigation plan will be distributed for review and if no objections are filed, the RGU will adopt the AUAR document and mitigation plan. If objections are filed at this time, further review of the document will be required in an effort to achieve a resolution before final adoption by the RGU. Commissioner Melander stated that the material was lengthy and hard to follow, although he did read the comments from Rusty Fifield. In his opinion, Fischer is trying to get out ahead of the City before the Plarnirg Cornnrission completes the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. He ~.vonld like ±o see ±he Commission get through the process before being told what to do. Lovelace responded that there are certain statutes and a certain period of time for the City to respond to Fischer's application. Fischer is basing their information on the 2020 Plan and Fischer will need to come back to respond to what happens with the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Blundetto applauds Fischer for trying and the Planning Commission should not be threatened by the charts contained in the AUAR. Fischer will go after what's most profitable although the Planning Commission will still get an opporhnrity to state their opinions. Lovelace stated that the public still has an opportunity to submit comments to the City Hall up till September 26, 2007. Jerry Duffy, attorney representing Fischer, stated that there is a 30 day comment period and then Fischer must respond to each of those comments and forward this to the City. Then the plan would need to be submitted to the City Council. Chair Churchill stated that the Commission is in the process of updating the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. There are issues that the Commission is concerned about now that the Commission wasn't concerned with 10 years ago. Such as, the transportation comdors on the north side of the property and the county roads on the south side of the property. The Commission is particularly concerned on how the plans affect the transportation. The other concern is that Fischer's plan, the Commission's plan for the industrial use of land and the head of household objectives all mesh. S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2007 agenda & minutes\091907m.doc 16 Duffy answered that they will take those things into consideration. Cornrnissioner Melander commented that houses are nice and they generate tax revenue but they don't produce jobs. The Commission will push in the direction of supplying jobs for the City. Commissioner Blundetto stated that the Commission will take Fischer's application into consideration. Duffy stated that it is an environmental and land use issue. Each parcel will come into play in increments and each will be dealt with separately. Chair Churchill stated that Fischer has the largest piece of undeveloped land in Apple Valley and it is under one ownership. The Commission's hope is that we can work together. Duffy stated that there is some history here already with the land that's been developed and everyone is proud of that and anticipate the same with the remainder of the properties. 8. ADJOURNMENT Chair Churchill asked if there was any other business. There being no other business, Chair Churchill asked for a motion of adjournment. MOTION: Commissioner Helgeson moved, seconded by Commissioner Melander, to adjourn the meeting at 9:24 p.m. The motion carried 7-0. S:\planningV'LANCOMM\2007 agenda & minutes\091907m.doc 17