Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/07/2008 CITY OF APPLE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 7, 2008 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, Keith Diekmann, Frank Blundetto, Tom Melander and David Schindler Members Absent: Tim Burke and Thomas Helgeson 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 Diekmann moved, seconded by Commissioner Melander to approve the agenda. The motion carried 4-0. Commissioner Schindler sat down right after the vote. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF APRIL 16,.2008 Chair Churchill asked if there were any changes to the minutes. There being none, she called for approval of the minutes. MOTION: Commissioner Diekmann moved, seconded by Commissioner Blundetto, to recommend approval of the minutes of the April 16, 2008, meeting. The motion carried 3-0. Commissioner Melander and Commissioner Schindler abstained. 4. 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE/ACTIONS Community Development Director Bruce Nordquist gave an update on the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. An open house was held at City Hall on Thursday, May 1, 2008. The City's consultant, Rusty Fifield of Hoisington Koegler Group, Inc., and me, hosted an invited group of participants to discuss active living concepts and what that means in terms of land use planning. There was a study done by the University of Minnesota that suggests both are close in correlation. A well planned CGiTiiTiuriitj% i5 abetter CGTnTriuruty fGr 1ieait'tu`tii iivirig. There were three topics of discussion: transit, commuter biking and aging in the community and the changes that may occur in households. Staff is incorporating the group's input into the narrative that is being completed for the Comp Plan. 1 S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2008 agenda & minutes\050708m.doc _ 5. CONSENT ITEM --NONE-- 6. PUBLIC HEARING A. Village at Founders Circle -Consider amendments to the approved planned development agreement and site plan/building permit authorization for village buildings to accommodate two buildings on one lot -one 6,000 sq. ft. stand- alone commercial building, one mixed use building with 33,100 sq. ft. commercial uses and 129 residential units. Associate City Planner Margaret Dykes stated that the petitioner, Founders Circle Development, LLC, is requesting an amendment to the Planned Development Agreement for the Village at Founders Circle and site plan authorization for the Village buildings for 129 residential units and 39,600 sq. ft. of commercial. Planned Development Agreement Amendment: The applicant is requesting an amendment to the Planned Development Agreement to account for the proposed changes to the Village building. The Planned Development Agreement ensures that all parties agree that proposed developments will be constructed as proposed. Because of the proposed changes to the Village building, the existing P.D. Agreement must be amended to reflect. those changes. 2006 Site Plan: The applicant is proposing a revised site for the Village building, which is on the triangle lot in the Founders Circle development. In 2006, the City approved the site plan/building permit authorization for the Village building. The approved site plan showed 197 residential units on four floors above approximately 52,000 sq. ft. of commercial uses located on the ground-level floor. There was a 350-space below-grade parking garage for use by the residents, and a 197-space surface garage that was to be covered by an approximately 15,000 sq. ft. amenity plaza for residents located above the retail parking lot. The building had street frontage on Galaxie Avenue, 153`a Street and Founders Lane. The building was 4-5 stories on all sides. The developer, Founders Circle, LLC, is proposing a change to the approved plans. The revised plans are the result of changes in both the residential and retail markets. 2008 Amended Site Plan: The revised plans now show buildings along Galaxie Avenue and 153~a Street, but no buildings on Founders Lane. There are approximately 39,600 net sq. ft. of retail and commercial uses on the first floor, and 129 residential units (186 bedrooms) on 2-3 stories above the commercial uses. The elevations indicate that the building will be the same architecturally and use the same materials as the approved 2006 plan. included in the total commercial square footage is an approximately o`,00"v sq. ft. stand-alone retail at the comer of 153`a Street and Founders Lane. This will likely be the last building constructed, so it's not clear what the final use or building architecture will be. No building will be constructed without building permit authorization that will be reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council. The City will have other opportunities to review the building plans for all of the buildings at a later date. S:\planningV'LANCOMM\2008 agenda & minutes\050708m.doc 2 Entrance to the site is still gained from all three sides. There will be left-in/left-out access on 153`a Street and Founders Lane, and right-in/right-out on Galaxie Avenue. The driveway cuts are in the location as those on the approved 2006 plan, which was reviewed by the City's traffic engineer. In 2006, he stated that though it would be preferable for the 153`a Street entrance to align with the private street between the Grandstay Hotel, and Galaxie Commons, the City Code does not regulate the minimum distance that must be between a private street and a driveway. The driveway and the private street are off-set approximately 30 feet. While the 30-foot offset between the 153`a Street driveway and the Galaxie Commons private street is not ideal, the traffic volumes on the private street is expected to be low so that if a motorist were heading south and wanted to enter the Village building driveway, the maneuver could be accomplished safely. 1 It appears that drainage swales will be used to infiltrate stonnwater and provide substantial landscaped areas. Parkin :The proposed revision shows 204 underground parking spaces and 165 surface spaces, which are uncovered, for a total of 373 spaces. The commercial and residential uses require 350 parlting spaces. There is sufficient parking for all uses on the site. The underground parking garage is to be constructed under the footprint of the buildings on 153Ta Street and Galaxie Avenue. There will not be underground parking under the surface parking lot, or under the stand-alone retail pad at the corner of 1533 Street and Founders Lane. There is also a potential of 23 on-street parking spaces that could be used by customers of the retail uses or guests of the residents. Analysis: The proposed plan is a departure from both the approved plan and the Central Village Plan, which showed mixed-use multi-story buildings along all streets. One of the goals of the Central Village Plan was to create apedestrian-oriented, mixed-use development that incorporated residential and commercial uses in a compact, urban form. Staff was concerned that the loss of buildings on Founders Lane might reduce the urban feel of the site. However, staff now believes the revised plan creates a better visual connection to the stormwater green space to the southwest. The developer has discussed creating a walkable "urban" edge along Founders Lane to help define the space and create an engaging environment for the pedestrians. City staff is supportive of the proposed change provided the property owner installs trellises, decorative fencing, benches, landscaping, bike racks and other amenities to support a walkable `5rrban" edge. This will still advance the City's vision for the Central Village and offer the property owner some flexibility to allow this project to progress. Staff believes this is still consistent with the Central Village Plan and the 2006 plan and Staff is recommending the amendment to the Planned Development agreement and approval of the site plan. Commissioner Blundetto asked how many surface parking spaces there were before this plan adjustment and also what would stop any future developer of putring in the additional buildings at a later date. Dykes replied that there were 197 parking spaces before and 165 now. It would be difficult to come back and retrofit, although it could be done. The developer would need to excavate and install underground parking beneath the entire site. S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2008 agenda & minutes\050708m.doc 3 Chair Churchill, hearing no further comments or questions from the Commission, asked the petitioner to step forward. Petitioner, Dean Dovolis of DJ Architecture, stepped forward to address the Commission. He gave a brief overview of the urban design principles, the nature of the project and any changes. The project maintains the same principles and concepts. The changes also provide improvements in the urban design, extending the views of the pazk into the parking lot. By losing the underground pazking, it allows full-sized trees and landscaping and provides a lot of impervious area so stormwater drainage can be controlled and have a lot more greenery in the development. The pedestrian path will connect all the way through the park. Mr. Dovolis presented pictures ofwhat the completed project is anticipated to look like. There may be seasonal kiosks in the summer months. Grandstay Hotel is up and Panino Brothers is open and exceeding expectations. So, retaiLis successful in this area. The economymazket is weaker but this project will be designed as lease hold condominiums so that they can convert to ownership at any time. It will have the condominium standards and quality finishes. The exterior finish will be a combination of masonry, brick, stucco and siding. Some of the buildmg amenities are underground parking, community rooms and exercise rooms. Units will be spacious and large containing granite, natural woodwork, in-unit laundry, walk-in closets and large windows; all the features that come with a quality housing proj ect. Commissioner Schindler asked with the loss of the buildings, what will the exterior of the remaining buildings look like that face the parking lot. Mr. Dovolis stated that the architecture will befour-sided and all sides will be treated equally. Commissioner Schindler asked if the retail businesses will have two entrances. Mr. Dovolis replied yes. The tenant will have the choice of having the retail be either two-sided or one-sided with parking in the rear of the building. There will be store fronts on both sides and tenants are allowed the flexibility for which works best for their business. Commissioner Diekmann has a concern that there is a lot of retail on the main level - 40,000 sq. ft. of retail. In his opinion the parcel closest to the round-a-bout would be better served as a restaurant. The site does not have adequate parking for that now, so what are the concerns of the developer in that regazd. Mr. Dovolis stated that that parcel could be a potential restaurant site. Right now with a retail only scenario, the space is in excess of 20+ parking spaces, so it can absorb a restaurant. It may not be at that location, but it is a possibility. Commissioner Biundetto agrees with Commissioner Die'xinann that that location may'oe difficult for a restaurant. There are issues of parking and also issues of where deliveries would be made. Chair Churchill asked if there were any members of the public who would like to speak to this issue. Chair Churchill, hearing no comments from the public, asked if there was anything Dykes would like to add. S:\planningV'LANCOMM\2008 agenda & minutes\050708m.doc q Dykes stated that one comment was received from the property manager of the Shops on Galaxie and they are in support of the project. Dykes stated that the petitioner is requesting approval this evening so that it may move forward to the City Council tomorrow evening. Chair Churchill closed the public hearing and although it is not the normal practice to act on an item the same evening as the public hearing, hearing no comment from the public this evening, the Planning Commission will grant the petitioner's request to act this evening. Chair Churchill called for a motion. MOTION: Commissioner Melander moved, seconded by Commissioner Blundetta, to recommend approval to amend the Planned Development Agreement for Village at Founders Circle Addition to allow for the change to the site plan for the Village building located on Lot 1, Block 1, Village at Founders Circle Addition, as shown on the plans received in City offices on April 16, 2008, and April 25, 2008, subject to the following condition: a. All other documents associated with the Village at Founders Addition shall be modified to reflect the proposed changes to the site plan for Lot 1, Block 1. The motion carried 5-0. MOTION: Commissioner Melander moved, seconded by Cormissioner Blundetto, to recommend approval of the site plan for the Village building on Lot 1, Block 1, Village at Founders Circle Addition, as shown on the plans received in City offices on April 15, 2008, and Apri125, 2008, subject to all applicable City codes and standards, and the following conditions: a. The~subject lot shall have 39,600 net sq. 8. of commercial uses on the first floor, and 129 residential units on floors 2-4 comprised of the following unit types: 12 studios, 60 1- bedroom; and 57 2-bedroom units. b. A minimum 204-space underground parking structure shall be constructed, with at least 65 spaces open to the general public. c. A minimum 169-space surface parking lot shall be constructed. d. No building construction may begin until the City approves building permit authorization for all structures on the subject lot. e. A shared parking model, if deemed necessary by the City, shall be submitted prior to the City's approval of building permit authorization for the subject lot. f. The elevations shall be similar to those submitted on Apri125, 2008. g, ~rnsswalk~ gball be installed in the .ci„tirfa0e perking lnt that clearly delineate pedestrian crossings from public and private sidewalks throughout the site. The motion tamed 5-0. S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2008 agenda & minutes\050708m.doc 5 7. LAND USE/ACTION ITEMS A. Quarry Point Park -Consider site plan authorization to allow fora 36 acre community park with 8 athletic fields and playground. The proposed Quarry Point Park Athletic Complex is part of the Park bond referendum that was approved by Apple Valley residents in 2007. The proposed Quarry Point Park Athletic complex is part of the Capital Improvements Program, which is a component of the Comprehensive Plan. Minnesota Statutes require the Planning Commission to review the authorization of any capital improvements to determine if the improvements are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Staff is recommending the Commission adopt the draft resolution finding the proposed athletic complex is consistent with the Plan. The site plan shows the construction of 8 ballfields and a 235-space parking lot on approximately 34 acres. The plans also show the construction of a playground, a maintenance building, and amulti- purposebuilding; however, the City will request building permit authorization for these structures in the future. The ballfields will be installed throughout 2009 and 2010. The complex is slated to open in 2010. The site is accessed by the streets serving the MVTApork-and-ride lot. The MVTA lot, which is owned by the City, is a 244 space lot and is available for overflow parking. There are 479 parking spaces that are available to the users of the athletic complex. There is a large berm along 160"' Street West. that will be maintained. The City Engineer has concerns about the grading plan which will need to be addressed as the site is constructed. Storm sewer and water are available to the site and will be installed as the site is constructed. However, it is possible that sanitary sewer may not be installed until 157' Street West is constructed. City staff estimates that 157`h Street West will be constructed by 2010-2011. The street cannot be constructed until mining is completed on the Fischer property to the norkh. Unfil sanitary sewer is installed, the City will explore whether it is feasible to install a temporary septic system. The site is accessed by an existing bituminous trail on Pilot Knob Road, and 160a' Street West; future 157`h Street West will have a bituminous path as well. There are several trails throughout the site that lead from the parking lots to the ball fields. Commissioner Diekmann asked where the pedestrian tunnel underneath Pilot Knob Road will come out on the Cobblestone Lake side of the road. Assistant City Engineer David Bennett stated that the tunnel will be several hundred feet south of the new Cobblestone Lake Liquor Store site. That will probably be dedicated to the City when that piece develops. Chair Churchill hearing no further comments called for a motion. MOTION: Commissioner Melander moved, seconded by Commissioner Blundetto, to adopt the draft resolution finding the Quarry Point Park Athletic Complex complies with the Comprehensive Guide Plan. The motion carried 5-0. S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2008 agenda & minutes\050708m.doc MOTION: Commissioner Melander moved, seconded by Commissioner Blundetto, to recommend approval of site plan authorization for the Quarry Point Park Athletic Complex shown on the plans received in City offices on Apri128, 2008, subject to all applicable City codes and standards. The motion carried 5-0. B. Heritage Lutheran Church Addition -Consider site plan building permit authorization to allow for construction of amulti-purpose facility and classroom addition to an existing church. Associate City Planner Kathy Bodmer stated that the petitioner is requesting site plan review/building permit authorization to construct an 11,105 sq. ft. addition onto the existing 8,244 sq. ft. Heritage Lutheran Church located at 13401 Johnny Cake Ridge Road. The expansion will include two classrooms and a large multi-purpose room. The expansion project will more than double the size of the existing church. The project will entail the construction of two large classrooms and a large all-purpose room in the addition. An outside courtyard will be constructed in the middle of the building. No changes are proposed to the existing sanctuary, so no additional parking demand is anticipated. At 198 seats, the church is required to have 57 parking spaces which are currently on the site. The plans show that the parking will be expanded so that it has 99 spaces along with curb and gutter. The 99 spaces will accommodate additional parking that is expected with future expansions. to the building. The site abuts pond P-2 which is a DNR protected water body. The City's Storxnwater Management Plan requires a minimum buffer of 16.5' from the normal water level (NWI,) and an additional 10' setback from the buffer. The building must be a minimum of 26.5' from the NWL. The church eut back a corner of the addition in order to meet the setback requirement; all other setbacks are met on the property. Chair Churchill asked the petitioner to step forward to add to Staff comments. Petitioner, Russ Rosa of Rosa Architectural Group, showed color renderings of the future project. Commissioner Blundetto asked what year the sanctuary was built. The petitioner answered 1995. Chair Churchill hearing no further comments asked for a motion. MOTION: Commissioner Diekmann moved, seconded by Commissioner Melander, to recommend approvai of the site plan and give buiiding pemui authorization to construct an 1 i,1 G5 sq. ft. adaition onto Heritage. Lutheran Church in accordance with the plans received Apri128, 2008, subject to the following conditions: 1. The project shall comply with all City Code requirements and construction standards. S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2008 agenda&minutes\050708m.doc 2. The owner shall submit a nursery bid list at the time of building permit application that confirms that the value of the landscape plantings meet or exceed 2-1/2% of the value of the construction of the building based on Means Construction Data. 3. The property owner shall execute a maintenance agreement or other suitable agreement that ensures the perpetual maintenance of the pond buffer area and the two infiltration areas. 4. All light fixtures shall be hooded to prevent the direct view of the light source. The motion carried 5-0. C. Cobblestone Lake South Shore, Block 2 -Consider site plan/building permit authorization to allow for construction of 8 single family dwellings on previously approved twinhome lots. City Planner Tom Lovelace stated the petitioner, Signature Homes, is requesting site plan/building permit authorization approval to allow for construction of 8 single family dwellings on lots previously approved for twinhomes. The lots are generally located in the northeast corner of Cobblestone Lake Parkway and Eastbend Way and are part of a 20-lot twinhome development in the Cobblestone Lake South Shore development. The dwelling units will have an exterior design and finish identical to the current twinhomes. No changes to the exterior from the approved twinhome other than creating single family instead of the two-family buildings. The petitioner is proposing to construct a 3 foot high retaining wall in the drainage and utility easement between buildings on Lots 4 and 5. The City does not allow structures, including retaining walls in drainage and utility easements. The retaining wall should be relocated outside of the drainage and utility easement. Commissioner Diekmann asked what the maximum impervious surface percentage allowed for single family homes in this development is. Lovelace stated that off the top of his head, he thinks it's roughly 45-55%. These units would not exceed that. Chair Churchill asked if outlot B is common space. Lovelace answered that it is a common space infiltration area. Petitioner, John Sonnek, Senior Vice President of Construction for Signature Homes, stated that there are two beehives in C~utiot B that coiiect water. Aiso, 'the piantings were put in iast year. Chair Churchill asked if this is association maintained? Mr. Sonnek replied yes. This plan is simply taking the twinhomes, splitting them in half and placing them 10 ft. apart and making them into single family homes. The purpose for that is because the S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2008 agenda & minutes\050708m.doc g economy has changed their rate of sale so the interest burden on the other half of the twinhome that is not sold, when we sell apre-sold side, becomes so great that it becomes non-affordable to build the other half. Chair Churchill hearing no further comments called for a motion. MOTION: Commissioner Melander moved, seconded by Commissioner Blundetto, to recommend approval of the site plan building permit authorization to allow for construction of 8 single family homes on Lots 1-8, Block 2, Cobblestone Lake South Shore subject to the following condition: • Relocation of the retaining wall between Lots 4 and 5 outside of the drainage and utility easement. The motion carried 5-0. 8. OTHER BUSINESS A. A discussion of a study underway by consultants Dan Cornejo and Michael Schroeder that develops transit oriented design and development policies for the 2030 Comprehensive Plan update, including a discussion of transit and land use planning along the Cedar Avenue Corridor. Community Development Director Bruce Nordquist introduced Dan Cornejo and Michael Schroeder, consultants that are conducting a transit study along Cedar Avenue corridor. With support of funding from both the Dakota County Rail Authority and the Dakota County Community Development Agency (CDA), the City Council approved a work plan to explore transit oriented design. Mr. Cornejo and Mr. Schroeder have a presentation to cover this concept. Chair Churchill stated that the City has received several public comments speaking to this issue so tonight it is presented to the community so that we may receive public comment. Mr. Cornejo hopes to acquire the Planning Commission's expectations in regards to the study and how it relates to the Comp Plan. Mr. Cornejo presented a PowerPoint presentation. The development opportunities for this corridor are: • Transportation and circulation. • Land use and density. • Development character and placemaking. • Public infrastructure. Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) makes more efficient use of land and public infrastructure. TOD is a compact mix of complementary uses in a walkable environment adjacent to transit stops and stations, public infrastructure is designed to create landscaped public spaces and buildings have entrances facing streets and easy, attractive corinections to transit. TOD presents density, diversity and design. Mixed-use is available in and around Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2008 agenda & minutes\050708m.doc 9 Preliminary TOD principles for the City of Apple Valley: • Maximize ridership through appropriate redevelopment; promote mode shift. • Mix land uses and densities. • (Re) Design streets for all users. • Create destinations; make great public spaces. • Manage parking effectively. • Maximize neighborhood and station connectivity. Other communities that have BRT have experienced: • Bus noise/air pollution impacts; must use non-polluting fuels. • Must tackle. initial impression of lack of scale and permanence with innovative and impressive station designs. • Must have quality amenity environment and good pedestrian connections. Our consultant work outline for the City of Apple Valley: • Review previous studies and Comp Plan draft. • Interview key Dakota County officials, business owners, developers, market analyst; consider economic development potential. • Propose, evaluate land uses, densities and connecting streets and sidewalks. • Prepare TOD design guidelines. • Develop implementation program. What has been done to thus far: 1) Workshop with City staff; met with Dakota County officials; toured corridor and connector streets. 2) Reviewed previous studies and plans. 3) Interviewed business owners, property owners and market analyst. 4) Initiated analysis. 5) Second workshop coming up on May 9, 2008. What we've learned so far: 1) Fear of negative impacts on business operations from Cedar Avenue changes (decrease in access; will it become like a freeway?) 2) DO NOT allow grade-separated interchanges. This will kill our Downtown. 3) Not much TOD redevelopment expected in next 3-5 years; more likely once stations are in place. 4) BRT maybe good for Apple Valley in the long term, as community matures demographically; reinforces Apple Valley Downtown as focus of the whole corridor. 5) TOD retail and office more likely near Cedar Avenue (feed 147"' and 155"' stations). 6) Use circulator bus to connect to and from housing farther than''/4 mile (extend "TOD zone"). 7) Consider medical campus; education uses; farmers market; health club. ~7 ~,re2~e rea..y a ra., .V., eS lna ...nS ai,.. green . ^S. . 9) Amenities will be the key to getting people to walk and use transit. S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2008 agenda & minutes\050708m.doc 10 - Mr. Schroeder stated that most of the communities that are looking at redevelopment, it's about evolution, not turning a green space into something new. It's important for communities to get a mix of uses and also reflect the amenities that are important to the community. Mr. Cornejo asked the Commission what they think the consultants should be focusing on as they move through this study. Commissioner Blundetto feels that the City of Apple Valley is comprised of four little cities. The four quadrants aren't as easy to leverage against as he had hoped. In his opinion, there are some issues with the ring route; ranging from the materials used to not seeing as many pedestrians on the ring route as he thought he would. He feels the infrastructure is in place, but doesn't think the City has gotten the use out of it that he thought the City would. Mr. Cornejo asked then ifhe sees the future as not having grade separation so as to not further promote the four quadrants. Commissioner Blundetto stated that he doesn't know how to do that; possibly with tunnels, something that's not vehicular, he doesn't know. Mr. Cornejo stated that he doesn't have the answer this evening, but there is traffic and over the years there will be more. The question to ask is does Apple Valley want traffic to be accommodated through Apple Valley or shunted around to other corridors. A possibility is a tunnel for those that want to get from Point A to Point B and have the local streets operating on the surface. An example of that is the Lowry Tunnel. Commissioner Blundetto stated that we may not have the head of household jobs here that we need in town to support good restaurants, etc. Apple Valley doesn't have some of the large arterials like Eagan and Burnsville have. Maybe transportation is our problem and that is why Apple Valley doesn't have head ofhousehold jobs. Commissioner Melander started hearing two years ago that Cedar Avenue and County Road 42 was a "broken" intersection, because it was already at or above the level of traffic it can hold. An example of grade change that didn't work so well is at Anderson Lakes Parkway in Eden Prairie. The City still doesn't know what to do there. Commissioner Melander asked Mr. Cornejo if there is a glimmer of hope that the City of Apple Valley won't have to do a grade change at Cedar and 42. Mr. Cornejo answered that the work we're doing is intended to feed into the Comp Plan; to inform both the land use and transportation chapters and possibly the parks chapter. What we're trying to sort through is how the new service of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) will affect the community and how can Apple Valley use that to reinforce downtown as it was originally conceived, as a grid. Mr. Comejo continued asking how can Apple Valley use BRT to reinforce the grid or if corridor is more freeway iike, in i0-i 5 years, what does that mean for iand uses around it. Wriat happens to land use around it, for example, 394 or Highway 100, both of which started out like Cedar Avenue. But that doesn't have to be the case here. Some communities state that they want the area to stay a downtown and to change and reinvest but still keep it a walkable community. We're trying to put some logic into the development so that you can incorporate that into the City's Comp Plan. This in turn sends a signal to the development community of what the City of Apple Valley is looking for. S:\planningV'LANCOMM\?008 agenda & minutes\050708m.doc 11 It can be either a more traditional downtown or something that is evolving into more of a highway environment. It's not for the consultants to make that choice; it's for the community to make. BRT is intended to shift people away from cars and if the environment surrounds that, people will make the shift. Commissioner Diekmann stated that if the design of this system is form follows function, and we live in a surburban community and our typical mode of transportation is cars and now we're looking at the Cedar corridor and the proximity of housing to that corridor; he doesn't see the correlation of that in the near future. He does see a significant problem with automobiles, and how we live today and the price of gas. So we do have the pressure now which will make something change. Doesn't see the connection between the plan and how we live today. The City needs to build something that will work, not something where build it and they will come. Mr. Schroeder stated that one of the key items they've been asked to look at is not the final plan of what it will look like in 2030, but how we move through a period of 20-25 years of development; increments that recognize the changes in transportation or other forces that have been mentioned, so that it is an evolution, not a change of all at once. In speaking with. the developers the City wouldn't see any TOD redevelopment for another 3-5 years. The developers really want to see the transit structures in place before they start to make those changes. And even then it will be an evolution not a wholesale change. Mr. Cornejo stated that history shows in some of the communities around the metro, that cities have planned for the future and changed the zoning over time. When you're dealing with a built up city, it could take a couple of generations of development and redevelopment and investment. Mr. Cornejo said he doesn't know what the solution is for Apple Valley but it is not going to happen overnight. Some things will work and some things won't. BRT is not as strong in people's minds as Light Rail Transportation (LRT). It is important to do the first steps very clearly and strongly so the development community and the property owners know what the City is trying to do. It is truly about leadership and the Comprehensive Plan. It's a way to send a bold statement of where the City wants to be. Commissioner Schindler stated that his concern is that the build-out from Cedar could be a 20-30- 40 year process, but the decision of how Cedar is going to be laid out and how BRT is going to be set up on Cedar needs to be made right away. The City has to decide if this is going to become a highway or stay as is. Until that decision is made, as a community, on which direction we're going to take, it's hard to look to the future. Mr. Cornejo stated. that the City does have a draft land use chapter that talks about grade change lane separations. What direction do you see as most fruitful, for the community? It's probably best to make a decision now and stay with it. The BRT is going to cost money to install and the City does not want to undo that later. Commissioner Blundetto stated that this is a hard one and no one has the answer to this. He is in no position to give guidance in making that decision. If grade separation is a hazd thing to do for a really healthy city in twenty years from now, then we have to look at grade separation. Before we guide the City in that direction, we need the experts to give us the pros and cons of doing it or not. S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2008 agenda & minutes\050708m.doc 12 We want guidance and direction in an assertive way for what we need to consider from a transportation angle. Mr. Cornej o stated that if there is a driving foundation for the type of work that Mr. Schroeder and himself do, it's not a land use issue and not a transportation issue. Chair Churchill feels that we are approaching this without standing back and looking at the County. Apple Valley does not have the only north/south route in this County. We keep talking about making Cedar Avenue a freeway, although it does happen to be the most direct north south route connected with the bridge going across the Minnesota River, it is not the only bridge across the Minnesota River. So she doesn't think we should be looking at bringing all the traffic on a rapid route directly through downtown Apple Valley. Chair Churchill thinks we need to look broader on a county-wide basis and develop multiple routes. We need to develop multiple north/south routes as well as east/west routes. In her opinion, BRT does not require a freeway. She thinks BRT can be brought into Apple Valley without changing the 45 mph speed limit through the downtown area. And it can also be done without a freeway. BRT may take that route, but not every commuter car needs to use that same route. Chair Churchill stated that our citizens are very interested in arterial bus routes and that the City doesn't have good east/west routes. As our community ages, we might find as much need for transportation connecting the southern suburbs as we have going across the river. We're looking at trying to bring head of household jobs here so that means we need to consider bringing transportation into our City. It's not just a way to get people from Lakeville and Northfield into Minneapolis and St. Paul. We now have to think about the people living here and being able to get to work without cars and people outside of our community getting into the City. Chair Churchill continued saying that there is one glaring problem that we can't address by ourselves as a city and that is the two lane northbound section of Cedar Avenue going north through Eagan. If the state and the county cannot address that, we will always have a bottleneck through Apple Valley. It will just move it farther and farther south and adding BRT will not fix that. That route needs to be at least three lanes northbound. Mr. Cornejo replied that the view ofthe Metropolitan Council is that communities like Apple Valley that do Have downtowns need to be reinforced and added to so that people have a choice of living and/or working in that City. Also, transit is needed into Apple Valley for recreation or a regional hospital. Also, what Apple Valley has now can be reinforced. That image does not rule out a freeway through this community. A freeway may divide the City into two halves as opposed to four quadrants. An example is Golden Valley and 394. That is evolving from local to corporate. Chair Churchill addressed Community Development Director Bruce Nordquist to confirm that public input is welcome and to direct comments via email or phone to the Planning Department. Nordquist confirmed. Chair Churchill stated that we do want a broad community input. This issue will direct how our City develops and grows in the future or fails to grow in the future. Chair Churchill thanked Mr. Cornejo and Mr. Schroeder for their input and views. 5:\planning\PLANCOMM\2008 agenda & minutes\050708m.doc 13 B. Review of upcoming Schedule and other Updates Community Development Director Bruce Nordquist stated that next Wednesday, there will be a special informal session on May 14th at 7 p.m. in the Jonathon Conference Room. On Friday, the Planning Commission members will receive a copy of the updated draft Comprehensive Plan for review and discussion. Also, there will be informal sessions before the regularly scheduled meetings on May 21st and June 4th. Sessions after the regularly scheduled meetings will be scheduled as needed. 9. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further comments from the Planning Staff or Planning Commission, Chair Churchill asked for a motion to adjourn. MOTION: Commissioner Melander moved, seconded by Commissioner Blundetto, to adjourn the meeting at 8:45 p.m. The motion carved 5-0. S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2008 agenda & minutes\050908m.doc 14