HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/12/2008CTTY OF APPLE VALLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MINiJTES
NOVEMBER 12, 2008
1. CALL TO ORDER
The City of Apple Valley Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chair Jeannine
Churchill at 7:12 p.m.
Members Present: Tom Melander, David Schindler, Frank Blundetto and Jeannine Churchill
Members Absent: Keith Diekmann and Tim Burke
Staff Present: Community Development Director Bruce Nordquist, City Planner Tom Lovelace,
Associate City Planner Mazgazet Dykes, Associate City Planner Kathy Bodmer, City Attorney
Sharon Hills, Assistant City Engineer David Bennett and Deparhnent 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: Comrissioner Melander moved, seconded by Commissioner Blundetto, to approve the
agenda. The motion carried 4-0.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF OCTOBER 20, 2008
Chair Churchill asked if there were any changes to the minutes. There being none, she called for
approval of the minutes.
MOTION: Commissioner Melander moved, seconded by Commissioner Blundetto, to recommend
approval of the minutes of the October 20, 2008, meeting. The motion carried 4-0.
4. CONSENT ITEM
--NONE--
5. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Legacy North Memory Care -Consideration of amendments to planned
development ordinance and site plan/buildang permit authorization to allow for
a 4-story, 58 unit memory care facility.
Associate. City Planner Kathy Bodmer stated that the petitioner is requesting the following changes
to the building located on Lot 1, Block 3, Legacy of Apple Valley North:
1. Amend Planned Development No. 739 as follows:
5:\planning\PLANCOMM\2008 agenda & minutes\111208m.doc
• Rezone subject parcel from Zone 1 (multiple family) to Zone 2 (mixed-use
commercial).
• Amend the permitted uses in Zone 2 to allow an assisted caze facility.
• Reduce setbacks on Foliage Avenue and Fontana Trail from 15' to 10'.
• Amend the approved Master Plan site plan for the parcel.
• Revise the boundaries of the Planned Development subzones to conform to the platted
lots.
2. Site plan review/building perrnit authorization to construct a 4-story 58-unit memory care
facility.
The petitioner wishes to construct a 4-story, 58-unit assisted memory care facility on the parcel. The
1-bedroom studio units are shown clustered into 7 "houses" with shared living, dining and kitchen
facilities. Residents of the facility would receive 24-hour care for various stages of Alzheimer's and
dementia. The staff-to-resident ratios will range from 1:12 to 1:4 depending on the level of care
needed. An outdoor plaza is shown on the south side of the site and a covered porch with outdoor
plaza area is shown on the east side of the site. Access to the front of the building is taken from
Fontana Trail.
Lot 1, Block 3, is currently zoned PD-739, Zone 1, which allows apartments and condominiums (max.
48 units/acre), townhouses (max. 25 units/acre), and town offices (max. 25 units/acre). The approved
Master Plan for Legacy North envisioned a 28,000 sq. ft. two-story town office building with forty
(40) underground pazking spaces for this. parcel. An assisted care facility is currently not listed as a
permitted or conditional use in either Zone 1 or Zone 2.
The proposed facility, while an institutional use, is more consistent with the residential subzone than
the mixed-use commercial subzone. The City Attorney suggested the City consider a new subzone,
for example, Zone 1-A, that would allow Zone lmultiple-family uses, and also assisted care facilifies.
Other institutional uses, such as schools, libraries and churches would not be included in the subzone.
The site plan shows that the petitioner will dedicate 25' of additional drainage/utility easement on the
north side of the parcel for the existing City water and storm sewer lines. The petitioner proposes to
construct a dumpster enclosure on the easement. While the City has allowed minor private structures
such as steps and patios to be located in the drainage/utility easements in this development, they are
relatively easy to remove if necessary to access the easement. A dumpster enclosure would be a
substantial structure on top of City utilities that may need to be serviced at some time in the future.
The petitioner will need to find a different location for the dumpsters. An electrical generator is also
shown on top of a drainage/utility easement. Public Works is reviewing the matter to determine
whether this structure will also need to be relocated.
The elevation drawings indicate that the exterior of the building will be comprised of "stucco-finish."
The petitioner will need to verify whether they intend to construct the building with a true stucco
exterior, or whether this is a hazdi-panel treatment. The zoning district currently limits the use of
cementitious fiberboard products to no more than 50% of the exterior building area.
The fattre sout'~ driveway ofthe P.illcrest Acres development o„ the east side of Foliage Avenue
should be located on the plan to evaluate potential impacts on the covered porch and plaza azea. A
S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2008 agenda & minutes\11t208m.doc 2
lighting plan is needed to evaluate impacts of this use on adjacent residential properties. A revised
landscape plan is needed that labels the plantings that are proposed to be installed on the site.
Bodmer asked for comments or questions from the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Melander asked if Gabella Street was ever intended to intersect with Foliage Avenue.
Bodmer replied no, it is strictly for internal circulation.
Chair Churchill asked if there was a public sidewalk along Foliage Avenue.
Bodmer replied yes, there is a trail along Foliage Avenue. There will be no additional sidewalk or
trail on the east.
Hearing no further questions from the Commission, Chair Churchill asked the petitioner to step
forward.
Frank Janes with Hartford Group stepped forward to address the Planning Commission. The
proposed Regent Memory Care is a 58 unit facility designed and intended to serve individuals with
dementia or Alzeimers and provide full-time staffwith 24 hour care for memory care services. The
facility will provide interaction and activities designed to keep the residents active but also address
their needs.
It is a four-story building with no underground parking. There is a private parking lot to the north
with ten parking stalls for staff. None of the residents of the facility would be driving.
The first .floor has one of the "neighborhoods" and also the laundry, mechanicals, kitchen and offices.
Second through fourth floors would be identical in layout. There would be two neighborhoods on
each floor that would mirror each other with the individual resident units around the perimeter. There
would be a shared common area that would provide for staff monitoring, activities and meals;
programmed and managed professionally for the residents.
Outdoor areas would be completely enclosed and private, providing for a safe and secure
environment. The main entrance is on the west side of the building and an emergency exit is being
contemplated for the east side of the building. Staff and other facilities would enter and exit on the
north side of the building. Mr. Janes stated that they're continuing to work with staff on some of the
details. He asked if the Commission had any questions about the site or the facilities.
Chair Churchill asked where deliveries would be made.
Mr. Janes answered on the north side of the building or through the main entrance on the west side of
the building, with the intent for most to be on the north side of the building.
Chair Churchill asked if Mr. Janes could comment on the intensity of use of this building and the
previously proposed building for this site.
Mr. Janes stated that the previous proposal was for atwo-story office/condo building. That proposal
would have had more employees and more guest traffic. The current proposal will have no resident
S:\planning\PLANCOMM\Z008 agenda & minutes\1 ll208m.doc
traffic, only family and guest traffic and approximately 10-15 employees during the day and 3-5
overnight employees. Overall, employees on site would be less than with the office building.
Chair Churchill asked for comments from the public Hearing no further comments from the public or
the Commission, she closed the public hearing with the standard comments.
B. Piston Pete's C.U.P. -Consideration of a conditional use permit to allow for an
outdoor display in conjunction with a convenience store/motor fuel sales
operafion.
Associate City Planner Margaret Dykes stated that the petitioner is requesting a conditional use
permit (CUP). In general, if a conditional use permit is requested and the request meets the objective
standards delineated by applicable ordinances, the permit must be approved. The applicant is
requesting a CUP to display items such as water softener salt, landscaping mulch, firewood, and
propane tanks.
The property owner has recently purchased Piston Pete's convenience store, and was informed that a
CUP would be necessary to display non-auto related merchandise outside of the building. The
applicant says he would like to display up to four carts containing mulch and salt, which would
measure approximately 2.Y x 4'; three are already on the site. These carts would be placed by the gas
pumps, and are placed inside the building at night when the store closes. The applicant is also
displaying two 3.5' x 4.5' propane tank cages, a 3' x 4.5' rack for firewood, and two 4' x 4' pallets of
mulch in two locations near the entrances to the building. The total footprint of outdoor display area
is approximately 120 sq. ft. disbursed throughout the site. None of the display azeas extend beyond
48" from the building wall. The displays do not impede either pedestrian or vehicle traffic. Also, it
appeazs the displays are neatly contained, and there are several waste bins near the entrances to the
building and the gas pumps. However, the Fire Code requires these items to be placed 10' from the
entrance of the building; it does not appear that the firewood meets this requirement.
The request to display non-auto related merchandise outdoors is similar to other conditional use
permits the City has approved in the past at other convenience stores in the city. Conditions found in
other CUPS include locating display areas within 48" of the exterior wall of the building; requiring
bagged goods be placed on movable carts or racks and requiring those carts be moved inside the
building after the store closed; prohibiting the display or sales of live plants due watering and clean
up; and prohibiting the blockage of any sidewalk or entrance. The conditions were placed on the
display of merchandise to ensure that appearance of the site and pedestrian access would be
maintained.
Staff is comfortable with the display of items when located within 4' of the building, provided the
display also conforms to the Fire Code. But, the applicant is also requesting approval to display
merchandise well beyond that distance. Though the carts aze relatively small and the merchandise
does not interfere with access to the building or vehicles entering or exiting the site, there is always a
concern that these display areas will become a dumping area for junk. However, staff believes the
CUP could be crafted so that it was clear exactly what type of merchandise is allowed and how it is to
be displayed.
Dykes asked for comment or questions from the Planning Commission.
S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2008 agenda & minutes\111208m.doc
Commissioner Melander is concerned about the carts. He thinks they may roll around easily and
interfere with traffic, even with locking wheels. Alsq he thinks they will be hard to move and with
the winter season approaching, the carts maybe difficult to move and maneuver through snow and
slush and the wheels may seize up.
Chair Churchill asked if the business in question occupies just the north part of the building.
Dykes replied that Piston Pete's actually owns the entire building, although they do have a for rent
sign on the south end of the building.
Chair Churchill asked the petitioner to step forward.
The petitioner Pete Graffunder, President of Piston Pete's, stepped forward to address the
Commission's questions.
Chair Churchill asked what the advantage is to have the display items at the gas pumps rather than
closer to the building.
Mr. Graffunder explained that customers carry a bag ofsalt from the building to their vehicle at the
gas pump and in the process somehow the bag has ripped open and salt or mulch have gotten all over
the place from the building to the pumps. They do clean it up immediately, although the customer
does not want to pay for it. It seems to cause more problems having the items at the building. It's
more convenient for people to get the product into their trunk having the display at the pumps. They
keep the carts in brand new condition and the wheels do have locks and they are greased once a week.
The tires are large enough, although skinny enough to be pushed through the slush and snow into the
car wash to be stored overnight.
Commissioner Blundetto asked the petitioner if he is already displaying the carts at the pumps.
Mr. Graffunder answered yes.
Chair Churchill stated that she stops at this facility quite often and has not noticed any broken bags
or anything of that nature.
Mr. Graffunder replied that he employs afull-time maintenance person that keeps their store
looking presentable.
Chair Churchill stated that there is a lot of traffic around the pumps.
Commissioner Blundetto asked how long they have been displaying the carts at the pumps.
Mr. Graffunder answered since the end of May.
Commissioner Melander stated that he is having more misgivings as the discussion progresses. He
car. see this expanding tc seasonal prcducts.
Mr. Graffunder stated that he has no problems with specific product language listed in the
conditional use permit.
Saplanning\PLANCOMM\2008 agenda & minutes\111208m.doc
Dykes added that staff can limit the conditional use permit with strict verbiage.
Commissioner Blundetto stated that that would help him support it.
Commissioner Melander stated that the City would need to be pretty specific.
Chair Churchill asked the petitioner if the carts would still be displayed if there was a blizzard.
Mr. Graffunder stated that more than likely they would remain inside of the car wash since the car
wash would be closed during inclement weather as well. They would not be put on display again
until the lot is cleared.
Commissioner Schindler stated that he has no problem with it.
Chair Churchill directed staff to draft. language to restrict the displays for the next meeting.
Hearing no further discussion, Chair Churchill closed the public hearing with the standard
comments.
C. Cobblestone Lake Senior Campus -Consideration of rezoning and amendments
to the planned development ordinance; subdivision of 10.06 acres into one lot
and one outlot; and site plan building permit authorization to allow fora 214
unit continuum of care facility on a 7 acre lot.
City Planner Tom Lovelace stated that the petitioner is requesting rezoning, subdivision and site
plan building pemrit authorization for the site generally located south of the intersection of
Cobblestone Lake Parkway and 157th Street West:
• Rezoning: Request rezoning from "PD-703/zone 8" (Planned Development) to "PD-703/zone
6", which would allow for high density townhomes and apartment dwelling units at an overall
density oftwenty-four (24) units per acre and mixed retail business, limited business, and
institutional uses, and planned development ordinance amendments to the permitted uses, area
requirements, and performance standards within zone 6.
Subdivision: Request for preliminary plat approval that would allow for the subdivision of
10.6 acres into one (1) lot and one (1) outlot.
Site Plan/Building Permit Authorization: Request is for site plan building permit authorization
for a proposed 214-unit continuum of care facility that will include an 89,886 sq. ft. senior
community complex apartment building on approximately 7 acresof the proposed
subdivision. Approval of the site plan building perrnit request would allow fora 3-4 story
continuum of care facility that will include 152 independent living units, 32 assisted living
units, and 30 memory care units, with 152 underground parking spaces, 62 surface parking
spaces, and 16 surface proof-of-parking spaces.
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
S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2008 agenda & minutes\111208m.doc
become one of the other zones (zones 1 through 7), as defined, within the planned development
consistent with proposed platting and development plans. Therefore, this property will need to be
rezoned. The original Planned Development Ordinance No. 703 identified future zones, including
one (zone 6), that would allow for high density townhomes and apartment dwelling units at an overall
density oftwenty-four (24) units per acre and mixed retail business, limited business, and institutional
uses. The density of this project, which is approximately 31 units per acre, is greater than the
maximum expected for this planned development zoning district.
The project is located on unplatted property, which will need to be platted prior to any construction.
The plans show that the senior building will have 152 gazage spaces, 62 on-site parking and 16 proof-
of-parking surface spaces, which is just over one space per unit. The garage and on-site pazking will
meet the minimum parking required; therefore, it does not appeaz that the proof ofpazking will be
required.
The Traffic Engineer has sight distance concerns for traffic exiting directly onto Cobblestone Lake
Parkway and is proposing that the several on street parking spaces be removed. The petitioner does
not believe that all the spaces proposed by the engineer should be removed. An agreeable solution
will need to be reached before any recommendation.
The elevations show the use of "Hardie" lap siding and,shakes, cultured stone, and painted rock-face
block for the exterior finish of the senior building and "Hazdie" lap siding and shakes and cultured
stone for the senior town center/community center. The colored finish of the rock face block should
be integral to the block and not painted.
City code requires that residential developments in the multiple family zoning districts install
landscaping (live plant material excluding sod) that will have a minimum cost of 2 '/2 % of the
estimated building construction cost based on Means Construction Data. The petitioner has stated
that they will be unable to meet the minimum landscaping requirement due to the cost of the
building and property available on the proposed lot for planting. Staff will continue to work with
the petitioner to reach a resolution.
Concerns have been raised about 157' Court meeting minimum public roadway design standards, as
well as ongoing maintenance, in particular timely snow removal that could have an impact on access
to the building's underground parking. Staff has presented several options to the petitioner that
include designing the street to meet mirrimum standards; dedicating the area as public parkland and
not a public street, or having it become a private street. Staff will continue to work with the petitioner
on reaching a solution to the issue.
A monument sign is shown along the south side of the north driveway. No detailed sign plans have
been submitted. All signage shall be constructed in conformance with city code.
Lovelace asked for comment or questions from the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Blundetto stated that in reg?rds to the landscaping, the-site looks over planted now.
Let's go with a good plan to make it look nice. Enforcing the 2 '/z% rule would be ridiculous.
S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2008 agenda & minutes\111208m.doc
Lovelace stated that the City can memorialize it within the ordinance itself including the plant
materials and the irrigation systems, patios, etc.
Commissioner Blundetto commented that a lot of outdoor amenities can be used towards
landscaping. For example, instead of including the gazebo with the building, include that as part of
the landscaping amenities.
Lovelace stated that this is more of a traditional neighborhood design, which includes more building
on less land, removing the ability to put in the landscaping. As long as the landscaping
complements the building, that maybe fine.
Chair Churchill asked if the trail going around the lake and the sidewalk coming out on Cobblestone
Lake Parkway is part of the City park area.
Lovelace indicated on the map what was dedicated as park land and what is proposed as dedicated
park land on the east side of the proposed building.
Chair Churchill said that the last time she drove through that area, she did not see any plantings that
the City has done. Perhaps a way for the developer to meet the spirit of the landscape requirement,
would be to provide plantings on the park land.
Lovelace replied that is a good suggestion. There are three outstanding issues, the landscaping, the
157a' Court design and layout, which appears the City would not be dedicating asright-of--way, but
rather as park land. The third issue is the parking along the curve on Cobblestone Lake Parkway,
which can become overflow parking for the park. The City's traffic consultant has some concerns
about the sight lines related to the driveways located to the north and also to the east along the
curve, trying to meet a 300 foot sight line requirement. Discussions have led to pushing this back
175-200 feet, which would require removal of some of the parking spaces, while still retaining the
on-street parking both for overflow and maintaining the traditional neighborhood design.
Commissioner Blundetto asked if the landscaping is causing any of the issues with the sight lines.
Lovelace said anything that impedes the 300 ft. clearance would be an issue.
Commissioner Blundetto said that the landscaping issue and the sight line issue may be related.
Lovelace said that staff can work through the landscaping issue with the developer.
Chair Churchill stated that primarily a safe entrance and exit needs to be provided for vehicles.
Commissioner Blundetto said lets use common sense and reduce the landscaping so that it doesn't
create a safety hazard.
Assistant City Engineer David Bennett stated that the only movement where landscaping would be
~n issue is on the north entrance and ±he movement Ye the north. Landscaping may stiIl be placed
there, but there would be height requirements.
Commissioner Blundetto asked what is causing the concern on the curve.
S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2008 agenda & minutes\111208m.doc
Bennett replied that it is the policies and standards set forth for the sight lines for vehicles to safely
maneuver out of that entrance and moving onto the parkway.
Lovelace stated that some of these standards are taking into account a street that Cobblestone Lake
Parkway is not going to be like. The street itself has many curves and the way it's been designed
with the parking lends itself to a slower speed. That may lend itself to a reduction in the 300 foot
standard. City Traffic Consultant, Tom Sohrweide, has not had a chance to comment on the
proposed 175-200 foot proposal.
Lovelace said that other than the three outstanding issues, it is a good prof ect and staff is excited
about it.
Chair Churchill hearing no further comments from the Commission asked the petitioner to step
forward.
Rob Wachholz with Tradition Development, developer of the Cobblestone Lake project; addressed
the Commission. Senior housing has been a significant part of the plan for Cobblestone Lake
development since the onset. He stated that he wanted to touch on the three issues that they've been
working with staff to resolve. In regards to the landscaping, the project cannot be burdened by
more requirements of offsite plantings. It ruins the feasibility of the project itself. The other thing
that the whole analysis fails to take into consideration is all the other landscaping Tradition
Development, as a developer, have installed on boulevards, medians, the parks and other places.
The rational thing to say is that this is a good landscape plan. And we feel that it is; it's over the
top. Our contention was that 157th Court was a public street. We are working with staff to
compromise that it would be park land. Our uses both to the south here as opposed to the senior
facility and to the north would be given an easement to access to this transportation route and we do
have concerns to the attentiveness of snow removal. He stated that he's been given assurance that it
would be treated as any other side street in the Cobblestone Lake development. hi regards to the
sight line issue, the proposed 155 foot line removes one parking space. We are still working with
staff for a reasonable solution.
Tim Trimble with Oxford Senior Funds stated that as a senior housing operator, a lot of money is
invested inside the building which results in more money on the construction costs. Had this been
an apartment building, those numbers would be substantially less, which by the formula would
mean a lot less would be spent on landscaping. We want the landscaping to be of a high quality and
to look first-class. He hopes the landscaping will be approved as designed.
Commissioner Melander stated that he believes the City can work with the developer on the
landscaping and the Commission welcomes this type of development to the City.
Chair Churchill asked if anyone from the public would like to address this issue.
Alan Kohls, 15634 Early Bird Circle, stated that he is the President of the association at Legacy
North Shores of Cobblestone Lake. He th;n_ks tl!e plan is unique and demographicall_ycompatiMe
for the neighborhood. He believes the building will blend with and enhance the Cobblestone Lake
development and the seniors will enjoy the lake as much as the other residents. It's a very positive
environment for everyone.
S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2008 agenda & minutes\111208m.doc
Craig Polsfuss, 15552 Dynasty Way, asked if the area north of the proposed building was ever
going to be a main street with retail and commercial or not and if it was, will this proposal replace
that.
Lovelace stated that the master plan ebbs and flows as market conditions fluctuate. Initially it was
proposed with the courtyard area and some commercial but that has gone away with the larger
parcels being identified as commercial, although, the developer does have the ability to put in
additional commercial in the future.
Chair Churchill asked that if additional commercial were to go in, hypothetically, where would it
perhaps be located.
Lovelace stated that it could go east and south of the new liquor store.
Chair Churchill hearing no further comments from the public or the Commission closed the public
hearing. She stated that although it is not the practice of the Commission to act on an item the same
evening as the public hearing, the petitioner is asking for a motion this evening. The
Commissioners were in agreement to make the following motions.
MOTION: Commissioner Schindler moved, seconded by Commissioner Blundetto to recommend
approval of the rezoning of Lot 1, Block 1, Cobblestone Lake Senior Complex, according to the
preliminary plat, from "Planned Development No.703/zone 8" to "Planned Development
No.703/zone 6" and Outlot A and 157a' Court from "Planned Development No.703/zone 8" to
"Planned Development No.703/zone 7". The motion carried 4-0.
MOTION: Commissioner Schindler moved, seconded by Commissioner Blundetto to recommend
that the City Council direct staff to prepare the necessary draft planned development ordinance
amendments for "Planned Development No.703/zone 6" that shall include permitted, conditional, and
accessory uses; area requirements; and performance standards. The motion carried 4-0.
MOTION: Commissioner Melander moved, seconded by Commissioner Schindler to recommend
approval of the Cobblestone Lake Senior Complex preliminary plat, subject to meeting all applicable
subdivision ordinances and the following conditions:
a. 157' Court shall be dedicated as public park.
b. An access and maintenance agreement for the proposed park area, identified as 157'
Court shall be executed prior to fmal plat approval.
c. The Cobblestone Lake Parkway sightline issue shall be resolved to the satisfaction of
both parties prior to City Council approval.
The motion carried 4-0.
MOTION: Commissioner Melander moved, seconded by Commissioner Schindler to recommend
approval of the site plan/building permit authorization to allow for construction of 214-unit continuum
of care facility on Lot 1, Block 1, Cobblestone Lake Seniors Complex according to the preliminary
pla± subject ±o a resoh~±ion be±ween the City and petitioner or, Lhe required landscaping far ±he projec±.
The motion carried 4-0.
6. LAND USE/ACTION ITEMS
S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2008 agenda&minutes\111208mdoc t0
A. Apple Valley East Townhomes -Consider rezoning from "SG" (Sand and
Gravel) to "PD" (Planned Development), subdivision of 22.44 acres into one lot
and one outlot, and site plan building permit authorization to allow for
construction of 45 townhome dwelling units.
City Planner Tom Lovelace stated that the petitioner is requesting a rezoning from "SG" (Sand and
Gravel) to "PD" (Planned Development), subdivision by plat of 22.44 acres into one (1) lot and one
(1) outlot, and site plan building permit authorization to allow for constmction of 45 townhouse
dwelling units on the proposed 4.8 acre lot. The site is located at the northeast corner of Pilot Knob
Road and 155th Street West.
Rezoning of the property will be necessary, as well as development of a planned development
ordinance that will identify permitted, conditional, and accessory uses; performance standards; and
area requirements consistent with the proposed development. The proposed outlot would likely be
identified as a separate sub zone within the planned development zoning designation, but the uses,
performance standards, and area requirements would be established at the time of submission of a
development proposal. Concerns have been raised by the public and the Commission regarding the
future development of the outlot. The petitioner has been requested to provide future plans for the
outlot.
A storm water pond is currently located in the southwest corner of the property. Staff informed the
petitioner that a drainage and utility easement over the ponding azea and any storm water lines leading
iri and out of the pond would be required, which has been indicated on their revised preliminary plat.
Staff requested that the petitioner should consider adding more brick or stone and look at applying
those materials in different ways that would help to break up the repetitiveness. ofthe development's
building exterior. Revised elevations have been submitted that identify additional stone on the rear of
the buildings.
Staff identified several concerns regarding sidewalk widths and pedestrian connection, which the
petitioner has addressed on their revised plans.
The Natural Resources Coordinator proposed some revisions to the submitted landscape plan. The
petitioner has not submitted any revised landscape plans at this time. Therefore, project approval shall
be contingent upon revisions to the landscape plan per the Natural Resources Coordinator's
recommendations.
The original site plan was reviewed by the City's Traffic Engineer and his comments were forwarded
to the petitioner. The petitioner has revised their plans to address the Traffic Engineer's concems.
The petitioner has identified two monument signs with 28 sq. ft. of copy area, one at each entrance
into the development. No formal sign application for the proposed signs has been submitted with
this request. The proposed monument signs do not meet all current code regulations and revisions
should be made prior to submission of a sign pem?it application t11at would bring the signage into
compliance.
Lovelace asked for comments and questions from the Planning Commission.
s:\planning\PLANCOMM\2008 agenda & minutes\111208m.doc 11
Chair Churchill hearing no comments from the Commission asked the petitioner if they would like
to add additional comments.
Kari Gill, Dakota County Community Development Agency (CDA) stepped forward to introduce
herself and to address any concerns of the Commission.
Chair Churchill hearing no further comments from the Commission asked for a motion.
MOTION: Commissioner Blundetto moved, seconded by Commissioner Melander, to recommend
approval of the rezoning of the property, described as APPLE VALLEY EAST FAMILY
TOWNIIOMES preliminary plat, from "SG" (Sand and Gravel) to "PD" (Planned Development).
The motion carried 4-0.
MOTION`. Commissioner Blundetto moved, seconded by Commissioner Melander, to recommend
approval that the City Council direct staff to prepare the necessary draft planned development
ordinance that shall include pemutted, conditional, and accessory uses; area requirements; and
performance standards. The motion carried 4-0.
MOTION: Commissioner Blundetto moved, seconded by Commissioner Melander, to recommend
approval of the APPLE VALLEY EAST FAMILY TOWNI-TOMES preliminary plat, subject to
meeting all applicable subdivision ordinances. The motion carried 4-0.
MOTION: Commissioner Blundetto moved, seconded by Commissioner Melander, to recommend
approval of the site plan building permit authorization to allow for construction of 45 townhouse
dwelling units on Lot 1, Bloek 1, APPLE VALLEY EAST FAMILY TOWNHOMES preliminary
plat subject to adhering to the following conditions prior to issuance of a building permit:
a. Revisions shall be made to the landscape plan that shall include additional foundation
plantings and the Natural Resources Coordinator's recommendations.
b. A foundation planting plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the City.
The motion carried 4-0.
OTHER BUSINESS
--NONE--
8. ADJOURNMENT
Hearing no further comments from the Plarming Staff or Planning Commission, Chair Churchill
asked for a motion to adjourn.
MOTION: Commissioner Schindler moved, seconded by Commissioner Melander, to adjoum the
meeting at 8:57 p.m. The motion carried 3-0.
S:\planning\PLANCOMM\2008 agenda & minutes\111208m.doc t2