HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/16/1994CITY OF APPLE VALLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
March 16, 1994
f 6nlla 111ZI7:317D]S
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.
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Chairman Alan Felkner asked staff if there were any changes or corrections to the
proposed agenda. Staff responded that Item 4B should be moved to become Item 5B. This
item is a public hearing, not a consent issue.
MOTION: Member Edgeton moved, seconded by Member Gowling, to approve the
agenda as amended. The amended agenda was approved 7 - 0.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MARCH 2, 1994
Chairman Felkner asked if there were any changes or corrections to the draft copy
of the minutes. There being none, he called for a motion.
MOTION: Member Gowling moved, seconded by Member Edgeton, to approve the
minutes as submitted. The minutes were approved 7 - 0.
4. CONSENT ITEMS
Chairman. Felkner explained that the consent agenda was for items of a non-
controversial or routine nature that can be approved with a single motion.
MOTION: Member Gowling moved, seconded by Member Cady, to approve the
preliminary plat of Palomino Oaks. The motion carried 7 - 0.
Planning Commission Minutes
March 16, 1994
Page 2
F� 0l8311 CIA '�p IAININI I
A. Alimagnet Landing Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning & Preliminary
Plat for 10 Single Family Lots
City Planner Richard Kelley presented this item. He displayed a series of overhead
transparencies that illustrated the site and the development proposal. This site, located on
the north side of Lake Alimagnet, is designated for multiple residential uses. While several
multiple residential projects have been previously approved for construction on this site, the
existing poor soil conditions have proven to make the projects economically unfeasible. The
Alimagnet landing proposal would convert the property from a multifamily use to a single
family residential use. The proposed development would create 10 single family lots and
a new public street system that paralleled 140th Street; this is the portion of the site that
has the most stable soil conditions. In order to fit the houses and the street within this
limited building area, it is necessary to narrow the size of the public street somewhat. Since
this new street system would be "single loaded," on- street parking could be prohibited on
one side and still provide adequate on- street parking. Staff does feel, however, that the cul-
de -sac radiuses should be increased from 40' to 45' in order to accommodate fire truck and
school bus turning radiuses.
Kelley stated that it was also his opinion that the southeasterly cul -de -sac should be
shortened to allow a greater separation between the paved surface of this new roadway and
the rear yards of the existing single family homes in the Cobblestone Lakeview Addition.
By shortening the cul -de -sac, it may be necessary to approve a small front yard setback
variance for one or two of the most southeasterly lots.
Kelley noted that the project also entails the acquisition of a surplus portion of street
right -of -way from Dakota County on the northwesterly side of the plat, at the intersection
of County Road 11 and 140th Street.
City Engineer Keith Gordon gave a brief presentation regarding the provision of
municipal utilities to the proposed plat. He stated that sanitary sewer service would be
provided via a lift station located at County Road 11 and 140th Street, which discharges into
the Burnsville sanitary sewer system. The new street would be constructed to 7 ton
standards. Storm water would be directed to a storm water holding pond prior to its
discharge into Alimagnet Lake.
Chairman Felkner asked if the petitioner had an additional presentation at this point.
Bill Hayden of R.C.S. Associates, Inc., did emphasise that revisions in the cul -de -sacs would
necessitate at least two setback variances for the lots on the end of the cul -de -sac.
Planning Commission Minutes
March 16, 1994
Page 3
Chairman Felkner then asked if members of the commission had any questions
concerning the proposal.
Member Edgeton asked if the acquisition of the surplus right -of -way from Dakota
County would limit the ability for a right -turn lane to be constructed at County Road 11 and
140th Street. City Planner Kelley responded that the standard right -of -way is sufficient to
accommodate the construction of a rigbt -turn lane. The surplus parcel being referred to
represents land above and beyond the normal right -of -way for a county highway.
Member Gowling inquired as to the elevation of the new proposed public street
relative to 140th Street. City Planner Kelley responded that at the entry point onto 140th
Street, the new road would have to match the grade of 140th Street. The new road then
falls off to an elevation below 140th Street at each cul -de -sac end.
Member Gowling asked about the normal setbacks in the rear yard area relative to
the proposed shortening of the southeasterly cul -de -sac, as well as what the average lot size
was in the proposed development. Kelley responded that the standard setback in a rear
yard is 30 feet. Kelley stated that the average lot size in this development is just over 33,000
square feet, which is substantially larger than the adjacent lots in the existing neighborhood.
The proposed revision to the southeasterly cul -de -sac would not cause any of the lots to fall
below the minimum required by ordinance.
Chairman Felkner then opened the public hearing for comments from the audience.
Brad Blackett of 575 Reflection Road noted that in the review of previous projects,
the capping of the wells in the vicinity of the old farmstead was a requirement. He asked
if those wells have ever been capped. Second, it appeared to him that grading for Lot 1 was
occurring below the ordinary high water mark of Lake Alimagnet and asked how this would
be possible.
John Miller of 13676 Holyoke Lane also had two comments. He stated that he had
been involved with the Alimagnet neighborhood organization in the review of the previously
proposed projects for this site. He stated that in one of those projects the Council had
deleted the requirement for a pathway connection from the park to 140th Street adjacent
to the rear yard lot lines of the Cobblestone Lakeview Lots. He felt that the pathway was
unwarranted and would be an infringement upon the privacy of these homeowners. He also
stated that as part of the construction of the storm water holding pond the City had installed
a silt fence and flotation devices to protect Lake Alimagnet. This equipment was now in
disrepair, and he asked that the City clean up the existing conditions at the shoreline.
Planning Commission Minutes
March 16, 1994
Page 4
There being no further public comment, Chairman Alan Felkner closed the public
hearing with the standard remarks. It is anticipated that an action on this development
proposal will be made at the next Planning Commission meeting on April 6, 1994.
B. Conditional Use Permit for Outdoor Storage in a Limited Industrial Zone
Associate Planner Scott Hickok presented this item, which involves an outdoor
storage area for motor vehicles at 6885 - 146th Street West. Hickok presented a series of
overhead transparencies that illustrated the location of the proposal and where on the lot
the motor vehicles are proposed to be stored.
Member Miller left the meeting at 7:30 p.m.
Member Edgeton asked staff if there would be any time limit established on how
long a car could be stored: Day time only? Overnight? Six months? Hickok stated that
there was no time limit on the storage of any specific automobile. The conditions would
simply state the area in which the car would have to be stored and what type of screening
would be necessary for the area.
Member Churchill asked if other auto service uses in the City also have permits for
outdoor storage. Hickok explained that this is an industrial area versus a commercial area.
In commercial areas, the conditional use permit typically covers the outdoor display and
sales of automobiles, with storage of automobiles in for service work as an incidental use.
Richard Tuthill of Dick's Valley Service, the petitioner, explained the operations at
his existing service station at the corner of County Road 42 and Gardenview Drive. He
stated that most of the towing equipment and dispatch services will be moved to this new
site, as well as indoor repair facilities and indoor auto storage.
Chair Felkner asked if this site would also be used for the storage of impounded
motor vehicles. Mr. Tuthill answered that it would be.
Member Blundetto asked about the activity level of the impound operations. Mr.
Tuthill responded that they impound about 500 vehicles per year. The average stay for a
motor vehicle before it is reclaimed is 3 days. He went on to say that the tow trucks would
be stored indoors, as would the majority of the impounded vehicles.
Member Edgeton asked about the fencing height and type. Hickok responded that
the fence would match the Lampert's fence on the adjacent lots, which is a chain link fence
with a barbed wire top. Member Edgeton questioned the use of barbed wire. Hickok
responded that it is permitted by the City Code, conditioned upon City Council approval.
Mr. Tuthill responded that he had not given it a lot of thought, but did not think at this time
Planning Commission Minutes
March 16, 1994
Page 5
that it would be necessary to place the barbed wire strands on top of his portion of the
fence.
Member Edgeton asked if vehicle repairs would be conducted on site. Mr. Tuthill
responded that vehicle repair would be conducted inside the building. This entails such
things as minor services such as oil changes, up to and including the placement and repair
of transmissions and engines. His operations do not conduct body work, however.
Member Edgeton asked how many service bays would be included. Mr. Tuthill
responded that two to four service bays would be installed inside the building.
Member Biundetto asked about potential surface water pollutants in the parking lot
that might come from heavily damaged vehicles being stored there. Hickok responded that
the city staff person specializing in hazardous materials containment reviews these situations.
Mr. Tuthill also responded that when a damaged vehicle is brought in with a potential for
fluid leakage, a containment pan is placed under the engine and transmission to catch any
drippings.
Chair Felkner asked if there were any public comments regarding this conditional use
permit hearing. There being none, he closed the hearing with the standard remarks.
6. LAND USE /ACTION ITEMS
A. Diamond Path Townhouses Rezoning, Preliminary Plat, Site Plan
Review /Building Permit Authorization, and Setback Variances for 42 Multiple Residential
Dwelling Units
Associate Planner Hickok presented this proposal and reviewed the history of the
development request. Hickok displayed a series of overhead transparencies illustrating the
location and configuration of the development proposal. He noted that the majority of the
changes were driven by the City's insistence upon the use of a public road rather than
private road. This was felt to be necessary because access had to be provided to an adjacent
parcel to the west which would otherwise be landlocked. The initial proposal contained 47
dwelling units. The options for this revised plan would result in either 41 or 42 dwelling
units.
Chairman Felkner asked what the green space computation would be for these plans.
Hickok responded that the 41 unit plan would result in approximately 50% green space,
while the 42 unit plan would result in 48% green space.
Commissioner Churchill asked about the distance from the street to the building on
the curved portion of the roadway. Mr. Hickok responded that a distance of 27 feet from
Planning Commission Minutes
March 16, 1994
Page 6
the back of the curb to the corner of the building would exist there. Commissioner
Churchill felt that this distance would create a hazard in terms of limited site distance for
vehicles rounding the curve.
Commissioner Cady inquired whether the two eastern street loops serving the
townhouse units would be public or private. Hickok responded that these would be private
street loops.
Commissioner Cady then asked if the association would be responsible for the
maintenance and snow removal on these private street loops. Hickok responded that the
association would in fact have to maintain and remove snow from these private drives.
Hickok also noted that the developer has negotiated a snow storage easement from
the property owner on the west where the new public street would have a dead end until
that property developed.
Commissioner Edgeton asked what was located on the northwest corner of the
property. Hickok displayed an overhead transparency that showed the relative location of
the Radcliff Townhome units located to the northwest.
Peter Knaeble, representing the developer, stated that they have been working with
staff for approximately six months to come up with an acceptable revised layout. He feels
that the 42 unit option meets the City's needs and provides a density of only 6 -1/2 units per
acre in an area that the Comprehensive Plan designates for a range of 6 - 12 units per acre.
Commissioner Churchill stated that she remains concerned over the 27 foot setback
at the curve in the public road and could not support the proposal because of it.
A general discussion ensued among the Commissioners regarding possible revisions
to the setbacks on the eastern side of the project, which would allow the interior of the site
to be opened up and increase the setbacks to the curve on the new public street.
There was a consensus among the Commissioners that they would prefer to see setbacks
reduced on the Pilot Knob side in order to increase the setbacks to the curved portion of
the new public street.
MOTION: Member Churchill moved, seconded by Member Edgeton, to table this
issue until the next meeting to allow the petitioner to come up with a revised plan that
increases the setback to the new public street. The motion carried 6 - 0.
Chair Felkner recessed the meeting at 8:41 p.m.
Chair Felkner reconvened the meeting at 8:50 p.m.
Planning Commission Minutes
March 16, 1994
Page 7
6B. Cub Foods Conditional Use Permit for Outdoor Display /Sales
Associate Planner Hickok presented the item which entails a relocated outdoor
display and sales area for garden materials at the Cub Foods Store located at 15350 Cedar
Avenue. Hickok noted that the proposed garden display and sales area is located on the
west side of the front of the building, which originally had been intended for use as a
wholesale produce pickup area. The smaller existing garden sales area would be removed
and this area would be restored to a cart storage purpose. The new garden sales area would
be surrounded by a combination of brick bollards and decorative fencing which would be
designed to compliment or match the City's ring route fencing design standards.
MOTION. Member Churchill moved, seconded by Member Blundetto, to
recommend approval of the conditional use permit for a relocated garden sales and display
area for Cub Foods. The motion carried 6 - 0.
6C. Lakeshore Setback Variance for Accessory Structure
Associate Planner Hickok presented this request for the construction of a gazebo
structure at 477 Reflection Road. The gazebo is proposed to be located with a 20 foot
setback to the ordinary high water line of Lake Alimagnet as opposed to the 75 foot setback
required by the shoreland overlay zoning standards. Mr. Hickok reviewed the comments
made by the Department of Natural Resources concerning this variance and explained the
topographic features of the site. It was explained that there would be no deck area as part
of the gazebo structure, just a landing from which the stairs would descend to the ground.
The gazebo would be 18 inches above grade.
Commissioner Blundetto asked what the size and height of the gazebo would be. He
was told that the gazebo would be 16 feet tall and 12 feet in diameter. The trees behind
the gazebo range from 40 to 60 feet in height, and the trees along the lakeshore range from
14 to 18 feet in height. Hickok explained that due to the topographic nature of the rear
yards along this part of Lake Alimagnet, the gazebo would actually be below the line of site
from the adjacent properties. If the gazebo were constructed adjacent to the house, it would
be highly visible from the adjoining properties. For this reason, staff was recommending
approval of the variance.
MOTION. Member Edgeton moved, seconded'by Member Gowling, to approve the
setback variance as requested. The motion carried 6 - 0.
Planning Commission Minutes
March 16, 1994
Page 8
6D. Klima Setback Variance for House Addition
Mr. Hickok presented this proposal which entails a side yard setback variance at
14748 Easter Avenue. The request is to reduce the side yard setback from the standard 10
feet required by ordinance to 8 -1/2 feet. Hickok displayed a series of overhead
transparencies that illustrated that the existing house was sited to be parallel to the curve
on the road. However, the side yard lot lines were not arranged to be perpendicular to this
curve. Consequently, the side of the house is somewhat skewed to the side yard lot lines.
This results in a diminishing side yard setback from the front of the house toward the rear
of the house. The proposed addition on the back of the house would consequently meet the
setback requirement at the point that it joins the house, but infringes into the setback
toward the rear of the yard. This is a somewhat unusual situation. Therefore, staff has
recommended approval of the variance due to the circumstances surrounding the house and
lot line orientation.
MOTION: Member Gowling moved, seconded by Member Blundetto, to approve
the variance as requested. The motion carried 6 - 0.
7. DISCUSSION ITEMS
- None -
E:�i7LY� ' 1 Ib9Ji;L�Y.9
- None -
9. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Member Gowling moved, seconded by Member Blundetto, to adjourn the
meeting. The motion carried 6 - 0.
The meeting adjourned at 9:17 p.m.