HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/02/1994CITY OF APPLE VALLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
March 2, 1994
1. CALL TO ORDER
The City of Apple Valley Planning Commission meeting was called to order at 7:02
p.m. by Chairman Alan Felkner in the Council Chambers of the Apple Valley City Hall.
Members Present: Chairman Alan Felkner, Marcia Gowling, Len Miller, Jeannine
Churchill, Frank Blundetto, Karen Edgeton, and James Cady.
Staff Present: John Gretz, Keith Gordon, Mike Dougherty, Richard
Kelley, and Scott Hickok.
Others Present: See the sign -in sheet.
`�. pro) &TO D\1 in
Chairman Alan Felkner asked staff if there were any changes or corrections to the
proposed agenda. Staff responded that Item 6B should be moved to Item 5B. This item
is still in the public hearing stage, not an action item.
MOTION: Member Gowling moved, seconded by Member Blundetto, to approve
the agenda as amended. The agenda was approved 7 - 0.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 16, 1994
Chairman Alan Felkner asked staff if there were any corrections to the proposed
minutes. Staff responded that there were none.
MOTION: Member Gowling moved, seconded by Member Churchill, to approve the
minutes as submitted. The motion carried 5 - 0, with 2 abstentions ( Edgeton, Cady).
4. CONSENT ITEMS
- None -
Chairman Felkner took this opportunity to welcome Member James Cady to the
Planning Commission. He noted that a vacancy had existed on the Commission for some
time, and that with Mr. Cady's appointment the Commission was now back to its full
strength.
Planning Commission Minutes
March 2, 1994
Page 2
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Cub Foods Conditional Use Permit for Outdoor Display /Sales
Chairman Alan Felkner opened the public hearing with the standard remarks.
Associate Planner Scott Hickok presented the item via a series of displays on the overhead
projector. He noted that the current location of the outdoor garden sales activity at Cub
Foods serves a dual use; when garden sales activity is not occurring, this area is used for
outdoor shopping cart storage. It is proposed to restore this area for the exclusive use of
outdoor shopping cart storage, and to reconfigure the area immediately west of it that is
currently used for wholesale produce sales activity into an enlarged garden sales area.
Additional decorative fencing and bollards would be constructed around the perimeter of
this area. He noted that the removal of some of the existing curbs and sidewalks will result
in the need to install some protective posts adjacent to an existing fire hydrant.
Commissioner Miller asked about access from this area into the building itself; how
would payment for garden materials be handled. Craig Streich of Cub Foods stated that
they would use portable registers outdoors. There is no direct customer access from this
area into the building, although there is a service door. Commissioner Miller asked about
the security of a remote register. Mr. Streich responded that cash will be picked up every
hour and that they are considering construction of a small decorative cedar building to
house the register operation, as well as provide the register operator with a cellular
telephone.
Chairman Felkner asked if there were any public comments on this issue. There
being none, Chair Felkner closed the hearing.
5B. Diamond Path Townhouses Rezoning, Preliminary Plat, and Site Plan Review
for 46 Multiple Residential Dwelling Units
Chairman Felkner reopened the public hearing. Associate Planner Hickok presented
the item noting that this was a continued public hearing. He noted the history of the
development procedure, which consisted of an initial application for an "M -4C" zoning
classification and 46 dwelling units on a private roadway system. Review of this initial
application centered around the issues of dwelling unit density, setbacks, and the use of a
private roadway system that would have to provide access to a parcel of property located
on the west. The development proposal now indicates 42 dwelling units that accomplishes
the setback requirements of the 'B" multifamily zoning categories in most cases, and the use
of a through public roadway to provide access to the property on the west. He noted that
the developer has requested that the townhouse dwelling units be allowed to have a setback
from the traveled portion of the public street in the same fashion as if it were a private
street.
Planning Commission Minutes
March 2, 1994
Page 3
Commissioner Gowling asked that for the next meeting Staff provide information
regarding the difference between the required setbacks in a 'B" versus "C" zoning category.
She also asked that information be provided regarding the zoning and land uses on the
adjacent properties.
Peter Knaegle, representing the developer, noted that they have worked several
months on this revised plan and that it does meet the Comprehensive Plan Designation of
a density between 6 to 12 units per acre. He stated that they had successfully negotiated
with the adjacent property owner on the west for an easement to be placed at the end of
the public street for purposes of snow removal.
Member Edgeton asked if the proposed townhomes would meet the 50% brick
requirement. Mr. Knaegle responded that it would.
Chair Felkner asked about the parking and green space in the development.
Associate Planner Hickok responded that, in addition to the two car garages, there was
space in front of each garage to park two cars, as well as some scattered overflow parking
on the private drive system. Because a public street was being used now, there was also the
opportunity for some on- street parking to occur during situations where a resident might be
throwing a party. Mr. Hickok also noted that 58% of the site would be landscaped.
Commissioner Edgeton asked if the location of the dwelling units might be shifted
east toward Pilot Knob Road to open the site up more. Mr. Hickok noted that the existing
contours of the land would make that difficult. In addition, since Pilot Knob Road will
ultimately be widened and carrying more traffic, it would be advantageous to keep the units
as fax away as possible from the roadway.
Peter Knaeble also noted that they are attempting to meet the 75 foot minimum
setback from County Road 31 from the 'B" zoning category.
Commissioner Miller asked about emergency vehicle access on the private drive
systems to some of the individual dwelling units. Mr. Hickok responded that the Fire
Marshall and Police Department have reviewed the layout and find it acceptable.
Mr. Knaeble presented an alternate location for units 7 and 8 that would move them
further away from the public street.
Commissioner Blundetto asked what the expected sales price of these dwelling units
would be. Mr. Knaeble responded that the two -story units would sell for approximately
$85,000, and the one -story units would sell for approximately $90,000.
Planning Commission Minutes
March 2, 1994
Page 4
Commissioner Gowling asked what the exterior building materials would be. It was
noted that 50% of the exterior would be brick, with the balance being a vinyl siding.
Commissioner Miller asked if additional building elevations showing all sides could
be presented; the front elevations did not appear to consist of 50% brick to him. Mr.
Knaeble stated that additional elevations will be presented at the next meeting. He also
noted that all of the units have optional gas fireplaces.
Chairman Felkner then opened the public hearing to members of the audience.
Alan Zelenka of 12851 Eastview Curve, in the adjacent Radcliff Townhome
neighborhood, stated that he felt that the development was too dense with buildings being
too close together. He stated that in their development overflow parking stalls are
accommodated off street, and felt that this presented a better appearance than the use of
some on- street overflow parking as proposed in the Diamond Path Development.
John Schweter of 12857 Eastview Curve stated that his townhome is the closest to
this proposed development. He asked if the grading on the site would remove the hill in
the center of it and if there would be effective homeowners association controls established
for the development. He stated that the most northwesterly dwelling unit in the proposed
development would place a garage and driveway in an open area that would be highly
visible from his living room. He also noted that only one access is being provided into this
site versus the two access points in the Radcliff neighborhood.
Charles Bergquist of 12851 Eastview Curve asked about the status of the ponds on
the five acre parcel located to the west of the proposed development at the dead -end of the
public street. He also asked where the decks for these proposed dwelling units would be
located on the floor plan.
Chairman Felkner asked if there were any other public comments. There being
none, he closed the public hearing with the standard remarks. There would be no action
on this item this evening. Staff and the developer will attempt to respond to the issues
raised at the hearing at the next Planning Commission meeting to be held on March 16,
1994.
Member Gowling asked if staff could highlight the setback deficiencies on the plan
itself at the next meeting.
Member Edgeton asked if staff could provide information regarding the actual
densities of the development on the adjacent properties.
Planning Commission Minutes
March 2, 1994
Page 5
Member Blundetto asked that the zoning categories on the adjacent properties also
be presented.
6. LAND USE /ACTION ITEMS
A. Avsur Acres Rezoning and Preliminary Plat for 6 Single Family Lots
Associate Planner Scott Hickok presented the issue and displayed several
transparencies. He noted that at the conclusion of the public hearing for this proposal, the
only outstanding issue was related to the construction of the roadway on the east side of the
property adjacent to Cedar Avenue. Mr. Hickok reviewed the history of development on
the properties on the north and south side of the proposed Avsur Acre Plat. He stated that
as these properties developed, a stub road was created on each property to provide for an
ultimate interconnection that would allow for development of the east side of the Avsur
Acre parcel. Mr. Hickok also noted that the two internal lots would be served by a private
driveway easement following along the existing driveway. This situation is necessitated by
the fact that there are two existing homes on a single parcel at this time. Due to both the
narrow width of the parcel, as well as the rather severe contours of the land, it is not
possible to dedicate right of way for a public street into the back lot. Mr. Hickok noted that
through negotiation with the developer and the proposed purchaser of the east side of the
Avsur Acre Plat, the four proposed lots would be changed into two outiots at this time. The
actual physical construction of the interconnecting roadway would not be required for
36 months following final approval of the plat. At that time, the road would then be
installed and specially assessed to the benefited property over a 15 year period. If, however,
one of the two lots were further subdivided into buildable lots, the roadway would be
constructed immediately and also assessed.
Member Edgeton asked about the zoning. Mr. Hickok responded that the current
zoning on the property is "R -1 ". It is proposed to change all of the parcels to an 'R -3"
category. He stated that the developed properties on the north and the south are also
zoned 'R -3."
Member Edgeton asked if Lot 1, which is the larger of the lots, could be left as an
"R -1" category to preclude a request for further subdivision. Mr. Hickok stated that this
would be possible.
Member Blundetto asked if the petitioner understood exactly what the staff was
recommending on the roadway installation. Mr. Pendzimas responded that they did
understand.
Mr. Moran, the potential purchaser of the property, noted that he also understood
what was being listed in the staff report. Mr. Moran also stated that previously he had
Planning Commission Minutes
March 2, 1994
Page 6
understood the term "development" to mean physical construction on property, and believed
that the roadway would not have to be constructed until that time. He now understands that
the term "development" also refers to the physical platting of property. It was the difference
in the definition of this term that caused his confusion in the past. Mr. Moran also stated
that he would prefer to have the last say on the date for road installation, but understood
that a compromise to establish a firm date for installation three years in the future was the
best possible solution for both parties.
Mr. Pendzimas asked about the shared private driveway easement that was referred
to by Mr. Hickok. In particular, he wanted to know if situations existed elsewhere in the
city where subdivisions of land were permitted with private driveway access versus public
roadways. Mr. Pensemis was informed that this situation does exist for a few older
homesteads in the city, but is not allowed for new development under the current set of
codes and policies. Mr. Pendzimas stated that even knowing subdivision of land with private
driveways would not be permitted, he would still like Lot 1 zoned as 'R -3" rather than left
as 'R -1:'
MOTION: Member Churchill moved, seconded by Member Blundetto, to approve
a rezoning from 'R -P' to 'R -3." The motion carried 6 - 1 (Edgeton).
MOTION Member Churchill moved, seconded by Member Blundetto, to approve
the preliminary plat of Avsur Acres, including a revision to show two outlots on the east
end, a stipulation regarding construction of the street within 36 months of final approval,
and a private driveway easement for the western two lots. The motion carried 6 - 1
(Edgeton).
Mr. Moran approached the Commission over the choice of the word "within" in the
motion, rather than the word "after." He felt that the motion could be construed to mean
that the road could conceivably be installed immediately because that would be within
36 months. The Commission agreed with Mr. Moran that this was not the intent of the
motion.
MOTION Member Churchill moved, seconded by Member Blundetto, to amend the
motion recommending approval saying that the road does not have to be required until after
36 months have elapsed. The motion carried 6 1 (Edgeton).
Chairman Felkner noted that Items 6C and 61) have been tabled until a future
meeting.
7. DISCUSSION ITEMS
- None -
Planning Commission Minutes
March 2, 1994
Page 7
8. OTHER BUSINESS
A. Tentative Work Session for March 9, 1994.
The Commissioners discussed among themselves the need for a work session to
discuss potential changes to the city's multifamily zoning standards regarding greenspace,
and possibly densities. Several of the members noted that they would not be available for
the proposed March 9th meeting. After further discussion it was determined that it would
probably be best to begin the March 16, 1994, meeting early for the purpose of having a
discussion. The Commission therefore decided to establish a work meeting for March 16,
1994, commencing at 5:30 p.m. Staff will have a dinner available for the Commissioners at
this meeting.
B. Bylaws & Procedures
No action is necessary at this time. A copy of the Bylaws & Procedures has been
redistributed to the Commissioners for their review. At some upcoming meeting the
Commission will hold its annual business and organizational meeting at which time officers
will be elected, and the Bylaws & Procedures will be readopted or amended as appropriate.
Member Churchill asked about the possibility of the city having an after -hours phone
number. She noted that this evening she was running late and attempted to try and contact
staff to let them know she might be a few minutes late for the meeting, but was unable to
get through as all the phones are switched over to a recorded message after 4:30 p.m. Staff
will look into this issue.
9. ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Felkner adjourned the meeting at 8:28 p.m.