Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/06/2019 Minutes CITY OF APPLE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FEBRUARY 6, 2019 1. CALL TO ORDER The City of Apple Valley Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chair Melander at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Tom Melander, Ken Alwin, Tim Burke, Keith Diekmann, Jodi Kurtz, Paul Scanlan and David Schindler. Members Absent: Staff Present: City Attorney Sharon Hills, Civil Engineer Jodie Scheidt, Community Development Director Bruce Nordquist, City Planner Tom Lovelace, Planner Kathy Bodmer and Department Assistant Joan Murphy. Community Development Director Bruce Nordquist introduced Civil Engineer Jodie Scheidt. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Chair Melander asked if there were any changes to the agenda. MOTION: Commissioner Burke moved, seconded by Commissioner Diekmann, approving the agenda. Ayes - 7 - Nays - 0. 3. CONSENT ITEMS MOTION: Commissioner Burke moved, seconded by Commissioner Diekmann, approving the minutes of the meeting of January 16, 2019 as amended. Ayes - 7 - Nays - 0. MOTION: Commissioner Burke moved, seconded by Commissioner Diekmann, recommending approval of a side setback variance of 11.5' for the retained 9,700 sq. ft. building where 15' is required on Lot 2, Block 1, Cedar Retail Addition subject to the following conditions: 1. The new exterior wall shall meet all building code requirements. 2. Construction shall occur in conformance with the site plan dated 1-30-19. Ayes - 7 - Nays 0. 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Ordinance Amending City Code Title XV, Chapter 155 Zoning PC19-01-Z Chair Melander opened the public hearing at 7:02 p.m. CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes February 6, 2019 Page 2 of 11 Planner Kathy Bodmer stated the Minnesota State Building Code (MSBC) was updated in 2015 and certain elements of the MSBC now conflict with some of the provisions of the City Code Zoning Chapter. The Planning Commission is asked to consider amendments to City Code Chapter 155, the Zoning Chapter, to bring the zoning code into compliance with the State Building Code related to building construction, fences and accessory buildings. The proposed amendments to the zoning code will make the zoning code better align with the provisions of the Minnesota State Building Code (MSBC). The amendments proposed are related to property maintenance building construction requirements, fences and accessory buildings. Ms. Bodmer summarized the new code. 1. Property Maintenance - Building Construction Requirements - Sect. 155.360(D)(2) Property Maintenance Provision is added to ensure that accessory buildings and structures are constructed and maintained with materials and methods that prevent storm damage, water infiltration and decay. The provision prohibits the use of temporary material for building exteriors and roofs and ensures the completion of construction projects. The long-term use of house wrap material, tar paper, tarps or similar materials is prohibited. Exteriors must be maintained with paint, stain or siding and roofs must be covered with shingles or other materials acceptable under the MSBC. 2. Fences - Sect. 155.003 Definitions The definition of "Fence" is modified by removing a provision related to building permits. Building permits for fences are addressed in a different section of the code. Sect. 155.351(A) Fences; Permits and Location Amends the requirement when a building permit is needed to construct a fence. The requirement is increased from six feet (6') to seven feet (7') to comply with the current MN Building Code provisions. Language is also amended to state that a building permit is required for a fence unless otherwise exempted by the MSBC. 3. Accessory Buildings - Sect. 155.332(A) Accessory Buildings and Structures - Building Permit Provisions under which a building permit is required for construction of an accessory building. The requirement is updated to state that a building permit is required to construct an accessory building that is 200 sq. ft. or larger. This update brings the zoning code into compliance with the MSBC. Sect. 155.332(D) Accessory Buildings - Setbacks and Placement The requirements for accessory building setbacks and placement are amended so that buildings in all "R" districts must be located a minimum of five feet (5') from an interior side property line, 20' from a street side property line, and 10' from the rear property line. Only a garage would be permitted in the front yard; all other accessory buildings would be required to be located in the side yard or rear yard. Sect. 155.332(I) Accessory Building - Anchoring The Building Official asked that the current provision of the zoning code be removed related to anchoring of accessory buildings. The current requirement states that all accessory buildings CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes February 6, 2019 Page 3 of 11 must be "suitably anchored" to the ground. He states that the zoning provision is vague and anchoring is more specifically addressed in the MSBC. Sect. 155.332(J) Accessory Buildings - Construction and Maintenance Provisions identical with 155.360 above related to accessory building construction and maintenance. All accessory buildings must be constructed and maintained with materials and methods that prevent storm damage, water infiltration and decay. Sect. 155.053(B) Permitted Accessory Uses (One-Family Residential District) A definition is added to clarify how the size of the accessory buildings are determined. In cases where the roof overhang exceeds 24", the City will calculate the roof area rather than the building area. This helps to address situations when homeowners wish to have small sheds with large roof overhang for shade or additional outdoor storage. The MSCB states that size of an accessory building is based on the building floor area. This amendment in the zoning code will be used to help address rare cases when homeowners wish to construct unique structures. Ms. Bodmer asked City Attorney Sharon Hills for clarification when the building code and zoning code conflict with each other, does the building code supersede and why. Ms. Hills answered yes that the building code does supersede because State Law says so. Ms. Bodmer added that when the building code gets updated the City needs to update these provisions in the zoning code. Commissioner Alwin inquired about the calculations on the building size with an overhang of 24 inches if the pitch is included when calculations are done. Ms. Bodmer said they would have to look at that because that was not the intention. It would just be looking at it from an aerial view. The area that is covered. Ms. Hills clarified that the 24-inch overhang is only applicable when we are talking about large vs small accessory building, not if there is a building permit. Chair Melander asked if the 24-inch overhang is measured at a right angle from the wall. Ms. Bodmer answered yes. Commissioner Schindler commented that calls the City receives must be about people that start projects and do not get them done and asked how is that gauged. Ms. Bodmer said there is a provision in the building code that calls for the homeowner to have to continue to make progress on the project and calls out 180 days. There are arguments that a tarp is water tight and what is being proposed is that a trap is not acceptable for a final inspection. She added that the City has been willing to work with people so it is just a matter of helping them finish it up. CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes February 6, 2019 Page 4 of 11 Commissioner Burke asked about the setbacks and what kind of issues there would be of the 5 and 10 feet and if grandfathering people in would be sufficient. Ms. Bodmer answered it would be sufficient but it may be when folks build accessory buildings they tend to do it in the smaller building but they want as much yard space as they can get. She added that any time the City requests a property owner to move it and it would be difficult. She was concerned that people would reply to the City that their neighbor got 5 feet and those kinds of comparisons. If the City feels it is really important to have uniform requirements, it could be dealt with. Chair Melander commented that can be tough with timing. It could have been put up last week and people could say it was there forever. So how would you know. Commissioner Scanlan inquired about the setbacks and now that we are increasing the square footage of the accessory building to 200 sq. ft. size without a building permit, is it better to have the bigger setback so not to put pressure on the neighboring properties with a larger structure. Ms. Bodmer answered that is something for discussion. Chair Melander said he would be more inclined to leave everything at 5 feet, no matter when it is built. Chair Melander closed the public hearing at 7:20 p.m. 5. LAND USE/ACTION ITEMS A. Springs at Cobblestone Lake Sign Variance PC19-02-V City Planner Tom Lovelace stated Continental 432 Fund, LLC is requesting height and setback variances from the city's sign code requirements to allow for a 20-foot tall monument along the east side of Pilot Knob Road, which is 25 feet from the closest residential building. The sign code defines a monument sign as a ground sign intended to permanently identify by name a residential development. The code also states that a monument sign intended to permanently identify a multiple dwelling or single-family residential development shall be permitted under the following conditions: 1. There shall be an entity established to the satisfaction of the city such as homeowners association, which shall be clearly responsible for the perpetual maintenance of the monument sign and its environs with corresponding powers to raise maintenance capital; or 2. In the alternative, there shall be a $1,000 fee paid to the city and a ground easement surrounding the monument sign granted to the city in order that the city may remove the monument sign and its environs if it is not maintained or if it otherwise becomes necessary to remove the sign. 3. The monument sign shall not exceed 40 square feet of copy area. CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes February 6, 2019 Page 5 of 11 4. The monument sign shall be a minimum of 30 feet from any existing or future residence. 5. The city, at the discretion of the City Council, may deny a permit for a monument sign where it is determined that the monument sign may create an undue burden upon the city by virtue of its size, location, building materials or potential need for maintenance. A multi-family development is allowed one ground or one building sign with a maximum sign area of 40 square feet and maximum height of eight feet. The minimum required setbacks for a ground sign are 13 feet from a public street right-of-way line, ten feet from other yards and 30 feet from any existing or future residence. He said the applicant has submitted two designs for consideration. The first sign will be a 20-foot tall three-sided sign, with 39 sq. ft. of sign area. The sign will be interior illuminated and will be constructed on a decorative stone base. The second sign will also be 20 feet in height and will sit on a five-foot wide pedestal. The interior illuminated sign will have 40 sq. ft. of total sign area. Both signs will be located 25 feet from a residential building. To provide reasonable flexibility in the sign regulations, the Council may approve a variance for a sign otherwise not permitted by these regulations where an exception would not be inconsistent with the intent of the sign regulations. No variance shall be granted unless the Council shall find that either condition (1) or (2) hereinafter set forth exists: 1. All of the following requirements must be met: Special conditions exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same district; The special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant; A literal interpretation of the provisions of these regulations would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district and the terms of these sign regulations; That granting the variance requested would not confer on the applicant any special privilege for a use not common to other lands, structures or buildings in the same district; and The proposed use of the property shall have an appearance that will not have an adverse effect upon adjacent properties and there will be no deterrence to development of vacant land. 2. Any proposed signage beyond the maximum square footage permitted would have the primary function of providing a public service. He added the applicant has stated that the proposed sign will serve as a presence and marketing tool for the multi-family development. The purpose of a monument sign is to permanently identify by name a residential development; and is not expected to be used as a marketing tool. He said the applicant stated in their letter that the topography of their property along Pilot Knob Road has several conditions that makes it a challenge to erect a monument sign that would meet the sign code requirements. The property is 15 feet lower than the street, the property line located 60 CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes February 6, 2019 Page 6 of 11 feet from the edge of the street, and a 20-foot wide drainage and utility easement, which restricts the location of the monument sign. One could conclude that these circumstances are conditions peculiar to the property that have not resulted from actions of the applicant. The site is adjacent not only to Pilot Knob Road, but also 160th Street West to the south, Cobblestone Lake Parkway to the north, and Elmhurst Lane to the east, which would likely provide locations for a sign that would not require a sign variance. Staff believes that the proposed request is not meeting all of the conditions necessary to approve a variance. Access to the residential property is via an entrance of Elmhurst Lane. The ordinance does not specifically state where a monument sign must be located, most residential developments locate their signs adjacent to its entrance. Placing the monument sign at the Elmhurst Lane entrance or near the intersection of 160th Street West and Elmhurst Lane would likely not require approval of any variances and would meet the intent of a residential monument sign, which by definition is a sign erected to identify a residential development. He added that staff has reviewed sign locations of other multi-family developments in the City and have found that their signs are located at the entrance or along the same street as the entrance. He provided some photos of the Boulder Ridge, Hidden Ponds, and Palomino East apartment complexes and Glenbrook Place rental townhomes. Mr. Lovelace said the applicant has other options for a sign and the City is not denying them opportunities to provide for a monument sign that identifies the location of their apartment complex. He added they could put up a monument the City is recommending denial of this variance request tonight. Commissioner Scanlan said when this project came up originally for approval there was a lot of discussion that they were showing signage at the entrance and the way this is proposed right now there is no signage at the entrance point or on the buildings or anything they were previously proposing. Mr. Lovelace said they have an opportunity as part of the code one monument sign or one building sign. They were looking at both a monument and a building sign. We told them they could not put a building sign on it because they were putting this neon piping on the building. So they do have an opportunity, based upon the code, for one or the other. They have chosen, and he gives them credit that they are very creative, that they are doing some kind of vinyl that would be applied on the windows of the clubhouse. That provides some information that you are at the Springs at Cobblestone Lake. He said he believes that is the case and had not been following that one that closely. Evan Weiss, Continental Properties, said the opportunity is why do we not move this on. Case in point is if we could we would. He said this site has challenges and why they need to have the sign exist on Pilot Knob Road. He provided an overview of the site and said the sign would be located in the northwest corner. He talked about the easement of the subdivision and intersection of Pilot th Knob Road and 160 Street. He said it is pretty massive and ideally it is where they would locate CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes February 6, 2019 Page 7 of 11 th the sign but it is not an option. Another easement exists near Elmhurst Lane off 160 Street and that is another subdivision sign indicating that you have arrived there. Staff noted that they could potentially move a sign to Elmhurst Lane and how far it would need to be set back because of the easement for the subdivision sign. That would put them at a severe disadvantage. He said that the City code states to provide the business with an equitable opportunity and they believe it just does not do so. He said the area for the proposed sign provides some risks, the 50 feet and then the 20 foot easement requirements. There are some issues overall. The general topography of the site is very challenging. The site itself sits 15 feet below street level. If they were to move the sign from th Pilot Knob Road to 160 Street, they would really be running into the same issues. He added that is not really a great option for them. He said another thing to note is that they are restricted by right- of-way access. So originally when they were discussing this project internally, the clubhouse was proposed to go off Pilot Knob Road. That has the highest visibility and the best option for their business but they cannot do that. So that is why the project comes in off Elmhurst Lane because th that is a requirement they had to do. The traffic count on Pilot Knob Road and on 160 Street both see 24,000 cars per day there. That is not comparable to the other two options. They are achieving th presence through the clubhouse on 160 Street and believe they would be foolish not to try capture the traffic of Pilot Knob Road. It is just too good of an opportunity and the proposed signage does meet the requirements of identifying a multi-family development. They believe at the current ordinances, if they were not going to be granted a variance, that it would pose a safety risk. Drivers would struggle to see the sign and ultimately does not meet the overall intent of the code because you would not be able to see it. It is not visible entirely. They believe denial would deprive the Springs at Cobblestone Lake the rights enjoyed by properties in the area and ultimately pose as a safety risk. They are proposing two signs. One that is vertical and they believe it meets the intent of the overall development in the neighborhood and the community as a whole. The vertical style is the choice and it meets the intent. This sign only requires a height variance not a setback variance. This would meet the code based on setback requirements. He added that this sign will not work at a lower level. The reason they are asking for 20 feet is because the base of the sign is 8 feet below street level. So really it needs to come up to street level in order for it to be visible. This is the reasoning behind the height. Their second option is they could build a horizontal sign but it would need a setback variance as well as a height variance. This would be the lesser of the two options. Commissioner Diekmann asked if the Cobblestone Lake monument signs were in place when Springs purchased the property. Mr. Weiss answered yes. Commissioner Diekmann commented that you were aware of their location and their size. Mr. Weiss answered yes. Commissioner Diekmann said the street locations were at the same height that they are today so you knew the topography that you were going to build on when you purchased the property. Mr. Weiss answered yes. CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes February 6, 2019 Page 8 of 11 Commissioner Diekmann said he is trying to find the hardship in this when you knew these pre- existing conditions. Mr. Weiss replied so they are pre-existing conditions but the variance code states that in order to be granted a variance the site has to be unique. Yes, they were aware of the challenges but they still pose unique challenges specific to this site. Commissioner Diekmann said the City offers a place for a ground sign at the entrance and there is location for this at the entrance. He added you are wanting this for a specific reason that he cannot find a hardship that backs it up because you are allowed the signage on the street. He said just because it is not per your liking, he does not believe is a hardship. Mr. Weiss commented that is correct and they could build the sign at the entrance to the building and that the City is going to get more of the horizontal design. It is their job to provide Cobblestone Lake in Apple Valley with a better option. That is why we went back to the drawing board and came up with the vertical design. He thinks it speaks better to the overall neighborhood. And yes to Commissioner Diekmann that you are absolutely right that we could build it at the entrance. But quite frankly we are trying to capture as much attention as they can and they believe the vertical sign along Pilot Knob Road is the better option. Commissioner Diekmann said it is part of the City policy and they try to work with as many businesses as they can and they do not want to create something that could become a slippery slope for any other development along any other busy road with 24,000 car count. He said the City has a sign ordinance and he feels we need to follow it. He said he cannot find the hardship. Gwyn Wheeler, Development Director for Continental, added that there already is a Cobblestone th Lake monument sign at the corner of 160 Street and Elmhurst Lane and putting another one there is just redundant. She said trying to come up with something that is the best for the community it could just look kind of odd. She said you drive in Elmhurst Lane and you are greeted by a subdivision sign to Cobblestone Lake and then another sign 100 feet in you see a Springs at Cobblestone Lake sign. You do not need another sign at Elmhurst Lane because it is already identified there by the master developer at that intersection. She added that on both sides of Elmhurst Lane it says Cobblestone Lake. She said they could place their monument sign there but it would just be redundant. She said they do not need one there because it is already identified. Commissioner Scanlan said you knew the challenges from the beginning and you bring a design for that challenge and now you are trying to look at other options here. He said he is supporting with what Commissioner Diekmann had already discussed. He said you talked about your project here and how it adds value to the community and the Cobblestone Lake community as a whole and asked what value does this provide when you speak to the Cobblestone Lake community. Ms. Wheeler answered having the best value sign. They are trying to come up with something that is esthetically pleasing and neat and come up with a plan that makes sense. Not to have redundant signage and yet looks at this as a whole and where does it make sense for them and not right next to an existing sign. What makes sense to other people that driving by and just coming up with CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes February 6, 2019 Page 9 of 11 something that is a little more unique compared to their other Springs at Apple Valley project. She said lbit different at the Springs at Cobblestone Lake. Commissioner Kurtz referred to the vertical sign image and asked if the businesses to the north would be blocked by this sign they are requesting. She said she is looking out to the other businesses how they would feel about it and if they were being blocked. Mr. Weiss said several of those businesses have podium signs themselves. Ms. Wheeler said they do not think the sign would block anybody because there is hundreds of feet in between and the sign is only 48 inches wide. Commissioner Schindler said he understands that the reason they want the sign there is for visibility and is that wrong ook at public service. You would not want something that says Springs at Elmhurst Lane and that does not make sense. He said it comes down to how people find things. Does the person say they live at the Springs or does the person say they live at Cobblestone Lake and he does not know how people are going to describe it. He said he thinks if you put it on Pilot Knob Road if he was coming to visit someone that lives in that development that is going to be helpful to him when he would be coming south on Pilot Knob Road or the north - there is the Springs. He said they should also have something letting them know that they are in the Springs if they are on Elmhurst Lane when people pull in to clarify where they really are. He added that is why all the pictures Mr. Lovelace showed had the monument signs right in the front entrance so people know they are in the right place. He thinks that should be their number one priority to let people know where they are at. He said he also sees the value of having the sign along Pilot Knob Road so people coming to visit know where they are. People who live there do not need the signs. It is only for the people coming, to visit the people who live there, who need the signs. He said it is useful to have that sign on Pilot Knob Road because you cannot see this development. It is down in the hill. He said, at the end of the day, all you are talking about is a variance for height and that is all we are talking about here. He said the fact is the way the topography is you are losing a lot of the height because it has to come up to get to viewing level. He said he does not have a problem with what they are proposing. Commissioner Burke commented that when he saw this he fully expected to see a sign where it said proposed full access point and asked if the plan was to not have anything there where the driveway to the development is. Ms. Wheeler answered that is correct and said it would be ideal to have one on the clubhouse and one on Pilot Knob Road but they are in a position where they need to choose one or the other. They believe that their clubhouse in itself will represent their community and be their signage at that entrance and their property management team will find ways through marketing materials and window decals to identify themselves that way. She said they feel it is a very large missed opportunity to not have some visibility on Pilot Knob Road, due to these constraints that have been discussed. CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes February 6, 2019 Page 10 of 11 Commissioner Burke commented that anybody that is going to find this place is going to use their smartphone and get to it by GPS. Ms. Wheeler said some people will just see their roofs and think they are close by. Commissioner Burke asked if they had a design what the sign might look like had they met all the requirements. Ms. Wheeler provided a design along Pilot Knob Road and said they would try to go with the horizontal option to try get it as tall as they could. They feel it is a less attractive option. Chair Melander commented if he lived in the Springs he would tell people he lived on the northeast th quadrant of the intersection of Pilot Knob Road and 160 Street. He does not think you really need He understands the advertising impact of having a sign there but that is not the idea for the signage ordinance. He would prefer a sign at the entrance if he was the one driving to try get in there. Mr. Lovelace said, , the purpose of a monument sign is to identify development and that the applicant stated explicitly that it is a marketing tool for them to help lease out apartments. That is not the intent of a monument sign as it relates to multi-family, as well as, a single-family development, be it investor owned or owner occupied. All we are doing here is identifying that you are here at this location and generally at or near the main entrance of the development itself. That is with the request of the variance. Staff is not saying they th put it at Elmhurst Lane and 160 Street and that gets pushed back and what that would look like. He said the applicant has not identified any signage at that location of how it would look there with meeting the 8 foot height and meeting the setback requirements that are necessary for that. He said they did it at the original Springs that is right at the main entrance of their development and staff feels that would be the appropriate place to put and they would meet the code. Mr. Weiss said they meet the intent of the monument sign code at least to identify a multi-family business and they do that through the signage and a benefit is that it helps with their business. At the end of the day, they are a business and they need to lease apartments in order to be successful. He said he thinks it is no different than the Target down the road in helping travelers identify that it is a Target, that they can turn into that store to buy whatever is needed that day. So to say that they are not meeting the intent of the code, he thinks that is untrue and that they are using it to identify a multi-family project. MOTION: Commissioner Alwin moved, seconded by Commissioner Burke recommending approval of the request for sign height variance for the sign set forth in the staff report for the Springs at Cobblestone Lake, located at 15899 Elmhurst Lane. Ayes - 1 - Nays 6. (Melander, Alwin, Burke, Diekmann, Kurtz and Scanlan) 6. OTHER BUSINESS A. Review of upcoming schedule and other updates. CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes February 6, 2019 Page 11 of 11 Community Development Director Bruce Nordquist stated that the next regular Planning Commission meeting would take place Wednesday, February 20, 2019, at 7:00 p.m. 7. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further comments from the Planning Staff or Planning Commission, Chair Melander asked for a motion to adjourn. MOTION: Commissioner Scanlan moved, seconded by Commissioner Diekmann to adjourn the meeting at 8:01 p.m. Ayes - 7 - Nays - 0. Respectfully Submitted, t_ Jo, Murphy, Planning De artment ssistant Aiprove4 by t e Apple Valley Planning Commission on / elan