Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/04/2019 Minutes CITY OF APPLE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DECEMBER 4, 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 and Department Assistant Joan Murphy. 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 Scanlan, approving the minutes of the meeting of November 6, 2019. Ayes - 4 - Nays - 0. Abstained 3 (Diekmann, Kurtz and Schindler) MOTION: Commissioner Burke moved, seconded by Commissioner Scanlan, approving the 2020 Planning Commission regular meeting schedule. Ayes - 7 - Nays - 0. 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Apple Valley Golf Course Comprehensive Plan Amendments PC19-09-P Chair Melander opened the public hearing at 7:07 p.m. City Planner Tom Lovelace stated although it is the policy of the Planning Commission not to act on a public hearing item the night of the public hearing, staff is recommending that the Commission consider a request for an amendment to the City's Comprehensive Land Map re-designating approximately 23 acres of land from "PR" (Private Recreation) to a low density residential designation with a density range that is lower than the "MD" (Medium Density Residential/6 to 12 units per acre). CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes December 4, 2019 Page 2 of 8 The site, located at the northwest corner of 140th Street West and Garden View Drive, is currently a nine-hole executive golf course. Adjacent uses include single-family residential to the north, single- family, two-family and multi-family residential to the west and south, and multi-family to the east. The "PR" designation was created as part of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update to recognize the current use of the subject property as a privately owned public golf course. This is the only property in the city with this designation. Staff is requesting that the Commission consider one of two possible re-designations. The first would be to re-designate the property to "LD" (Low Density Residential). The Comprehensive Plan describes the "LD" designation as areas in the city with primarily single-family, detached dwellings. Low-density neighborhoods benefit from a variety of services and institutions, including parks, playgrounds, schools, religious institutions, and appropriate-scale commercial. A system of safe and well-designed sidewalks and trails is essential to connect with schools, parks, downtown, and other destinations in the community. A variety of housing types may be built in Low Density Residential areas including single-family detached dwellings, duplexes, twin homes, townhomes, and other types of attached housing at densities of 2-6 units per acre. The second designation the Commission is asked to consider is "LDF" (Low Density Flex). Low Density Flex is a special residential designation for properties within an established neighborhood whose current use may be discontinued or is vacant. The "LDF" designation would permit the existing use to continue with the understanding that the future use would consist of residential dwellings that are compatible to and complement the character of the surrounding residential uses, while taking into consideration the development opportunities and the constraints of the property. A variety of housing types may be built in "LDF" areas including single-family detached dwellings, duplexes, twin homes, townhomes, and other types of attached housing at densities of 3-8 units per acre. Preferred zoning for a "LDF" area would be a planned development, which would allow for a more creative and efficient use of the property, flexibility of the distribution of the overall density and the intensity of land uses. Three wetlands are located on the site as well as mature vegetation established as part of the development of the golf course. Any future development on the site would need to adhere to applicable regulations related to wetland management and tree removal and replacement. An 80-foot wide pipeline easement bisects the property. The location of this utility will impact any development as it is generally understood that uses over a pipeline easement are restrictive and no buildings or landscaping shall be placed within an easement of this type. Commissioner Burke inquired if abutting property includes across the road. Mr. Lovelace answered that it does not and that it includes only what directly abuts the property. CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes December 4, 2019 Page 3 of 8 Commissioner Scanlan asked, for the benefit of the audience, an explanation of what a planned development is. Mr. Lovelace explained it is typical zoning with performance standards that are set, setbacks are set and that a planned development can be a little bit more flexible by massaging the setbacks and area performance standards to allow for a different type of development but still getting the same feel. Chair Melander asked if this would allow townhomes and when speaking of 8 units/acre it is really 8 times the number of acres of usable land for development. Mr. Lovelace said comprehensive plan designation is what you can do as far as future planning on the site. The designation of low density or low density flex tells you what can be done on this land up to so many acres. Then the zoning takes over and the zoning dictates regarding lot area requirements and so forth. Jon Kotek, 13583 Hollins Ct, commented he does not have a real big problem with this other than that little area off of Hollins Ct so it is not something too large there and does not want to see it bumped up to 9 or 10 units/acre. Brad Blackett, 457 Reflection Rd, asked about the abutting properties that are an easement. Mr. Lovelace answered that they are part of the 23 acres. Mr. Blackett inquired if that easement area makes it abutting or not. Mr. Lovelace said they still consider it adjacent to the single-family homes and said it was the understanding to get all the property together. Mr. Blackett said he was just trying to protect the homeowners and asked if under the current institutional if it is possible to do a planned development under that classification. Mr. Lovelace said under private recreation designation somebody could continue to operate a golf course. Mr. Blackett asked why it comes through in the Comp Plan as private recreation and asked if it was just a coincidence that it fell through from the previous Comp Plan version. He read excerpts from y flex has the potential to respect some of the 12 points of the Comp Plan. He believes the water runoff mainly affects the area closest to Garden View Drive and would like staff to work with a future developer to expand the capacity of the wetlands to help infiltrate additional runoff before it overwhelms existing holding ponds. th Mike McGettigan, 8589 136 Ct, asked if the wetlands could be moved slightly. Mr. Lovelace replied that there are opportunities within the guidelines through the state. CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes December 4, 2019 Page 4 of 8 Mr. McGettigan understands the pipeline cannot be moved. When he walks around the property he does not think the height of 35 feet is consistent with the current housing and believes the townhomes on the east side of Garden View Drive are less than 35 feet high. He referenced the handout regarding the phrase that future low density housing may be inconsistent with projected household growth of Apple Valley to 2040 Met Council has pushed back in the last 3 years on any reclassification of designations in Apple Valley. Community Development Director Bruce Nordquist commented if there had been any requests in re-designation through the Comp Plan process it has typically been to modify to increase density not decrease density. They encourage medium density and high density responses. Mr. McGettigan has a concern of a developer trying to change the wetlands and filling the site with as much as can be with a full 68 units and they would make that work to their advantage and adjust things as needed. He would like to see the site be low density. Chair Melander commented the difference from low density versus low density flex, if it were built out to the maximum, is 51 units versus 68 units which is 17 units across 8 acres of the 23 acres. Mr. Lovelace said he would need to check the wetland requirements but understands there should be no net loss when the ponds are changed or massaged that would be appropriate but they cannot be filled. Jon Kotek, 13583 Hollins Ct, said if you move a 1-acre wetland you must create a 2-acre wetland someplace else. Mr. Lovelace replied that is if you move a wetland but if it stays and you massage a wetland, then it is 1 to 1. Peter Coyle, representing the Watrud family, the owners of the Apple Valley Golf Course, said it is to amend the Comprehensive Plan and . They do not support the application as it was submitted. He finds it disappointing that it was not received better through this process up to this point. He appreciates the fact that staff thought the medium way to use the property given its challenges. It did get some support on the Planning Commission but did not get enough support. The Watrud family has owned the property for many years and operated a golf course for half a century as a service and resource to the community and their sincere request to do something reasonable with their property has not been recognized as fair and appropriate. It is the State Law gives the City very broad authority under its comprehensive planning statute to designate individual uses of property irrespective of what a landowner might use. He believes there is a need to apply the standards. Referred to Applewood Pointe and it being high density. When this project came before there were all kinds of policy reasons why this could not be done. It did not have transit service, not close to other services and not in the urban core. All those policies that were so important 4 or 5 months ago just seemed to disappear based on his observation and were not so important anymore. It appears to him an arbitrary treatment of two similar CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes December 4, 2019 Page 5 of 8 properties that does not make much sense. He said the application before you is putting so many bells and whistles on the low density flex designation that they would be left with something less than low density anyway. Concerns such as the height restrictions and placing something next to low density. The site has challenges and by the time you meet those challenges against the policies , you essentially are left with a low density application and respectfully they do not think that is economically viable and they do not think the City would have met its obligation to provide a reasonable economic use of the property for Mr. Watrud. So based on that they think this is not the right solution and they encourage the City to do more to try make better use of this property along the lines of what has been proposed previously by the Watrud family. John Ritter, 1709 Victoria Lane, Burnsville, commented he has seen phosphorus put on this property and something is going to happen there. There are wetlands, this is a bad situation and phosphorus is a big destruction to our lakes. Kathy Lundin, 13531 Hollins Ct, thanked the Commission for standing firm on the decision that medium density housing was inappropriate for the golf course land. She compared the development to Applewood Pointe and said they have homes directly on the golf course and Applewood Pointe does not have homes right there against that development. Homes they invested in and hope one day to sell. Thinks what the Planning Commission decided was 3-6 units/acre but even with 8 units/acre is better than high density. th Vickie Loher Johnson, 8907 138 Street Ct, asked if a planned development would prevent the need to fill in a wetland. Mr. Lovelace said he would need to look at the requirements. Ms. Loher Johnson questioned the LDF (low density flex) definition her types of could mean 3-8 units/acres. Mr. Lovelace answered townhomes and condominiums but would likely look like a townhome. th Nancy Dostal, 8804 140 Street Blvd, commented that she does not see the legal aspects that the city has responsibility that the owner sells this property as a profit. She had concern for the 6 single th family homes that directly face the golf course and that 140 Street is considered a buffer street but she would not call that a buffer looking at it every day. She is concerned that it says the higher th density would be established along 140 Street and asked if the single family homes along there could be considered adjacent to the golf course property just like the other houses along the golf course. Her concern was for them to be considered differently. Commissioner Diekmann asked Ms. Dostal if the city should be more concerned about her property or the golf course property. Ms. Dostal replied they should be concerned about both. CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes December 4, 2019 Page 6 of 8 th Jim Schiffman, 8680 135 Street, commented there has been a lot of talk about the city and developer working together and there is nothing about the residents. He feels all three should work together. He inquired about the easements when this would go to a planned development and thinks there will be issues with the old pipeline. He believes corrosive soils could eat the pipe away. Chair Melander commented that the Met Council has a hand in there too and this has been an awkward application with no plans to look at but they have been as respectful as they can. Harvey Henjum, 481 Reflection Rd, asked what happens to the residual property that cannot be built on. Chair Melander said the pipeline and wetlands are protected by law and the suitable land to be built on could be about 8 acres. Mr. Lovelace said this is not a zoning. It is a land use designation and then it will come back to zoning later when the lots and blocks will be established. He said the city is not the developer and that someone else will come in. Dustin Hammond, 13921 Holyoke Path, asked if low density flex is approved what are the assurances that they do not get things that are zoned medium density inside of this when they look at this as a whole. He was confused on the 23 acres with only 8.5 acres to rezone and was concerned if the density may be increased. Chair Melander said any acre cannot be more than 8. Mr. Hammond referenced the comment fr it does not make economic sense. He believes that argument is null and void. We should not be looking for something that necessarily makes economic sense but should be look at something that is the best value for the city. The best value for the city includes the water, the air and the community around it and not try to stuff as many units on it as you can. It is not the value of this property. He added it the property 10 years ago. th Kim Reagan, 8790 135 Street, understands the owner needs to sell but takes offense to the eels that with the flex plan they are being told it is still not good enough. She said they should go back to what they voted for several times and suggested to stick with just low density. Commissioner Schindler said he is comfortable with either low density or low density flex and said and to fight for what they feel they need. He has no problem with them coming in because that is what their job is and they are trying to maximum their investment. He appreciates this has been a golf course for a long time. Things change and economics change. responsibility to deal with the economics and that is why they do not. The Commission comes to a conclusion what is best for the city and obviously they feel low density or low density flex is best for the city. The landowner has every CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes December 4, 2019 Page 7 of 8 right to disagree with that and he has no problem with that. He thinks this is a good compromise, not looking at it from an economic stand point. He thinks it would fit in well and feels if it is a planned unit development, you would have the ability to design and believes there will be lots of land that will not be developed out of the 23 acres. He is very comfortable with either of these options. Commissioner Scanlan commented that these types of development are always difficult with an established parcel of land and the community has grown up around them. They try to sit back and balance the needs of the property owner and the city and yet be respectful of the surrounding community and how that is going to affect them. The city and the Planning Commission try very hard to find compromise and find the best balance among all the parties and we have successfully done that for a long period of time. He believes either of these options would be something that could be workable and the additional flexibility that the low density flex had could help with the difficulties that the property presents and giving some flexibility and how to move forward on it and the planned development will also assist in the fine tuning of those difficulties. Commissioner Diekmann said he struggles with this and is not in favor of limiting this to just low density. He believes medium density could work at this site. He said we have already restricted the landowner quite a bit. Amount of area to be developed and looks at medium with 8 units/acre and 12 units/acre. He did not know how we got to the low density flex. He believes there is some misunderstanding when we talk about Comp Plan designation and zoning, and then it would still need to be rezoned. He had concerns. City Attorney Sharon Hills clarified that the density is 3-8 units/acre but counts the entire overall site for the density. When the practical piece of the zoning is applied you may not get those units because of the zoning regulations as to lot size and setbacks. Commissioner Burke said he previously voted for medium density the first and second times. He was on record also stating to get something to 8 units/acre and feels they achieved that with the low density flex. He would be in favor of voting for this option if that is their choice at this time. Commissioner Alwin commented he struggles with not having a developer proposal and could be right back here with the owner regardless of what is voted on tonight. Lack of proposal is the challenge and it puts them in an awkward spot trying to development something that is not their job and his guess is they will be right back here at some point in the future. Commissioner Kurtz said she was in favor of the low density but does like the low density flex. Chair Melander was disappointed that Mr. Coyle brought up arbitrary and does not believe this is arbitrary at all with the number of hours that have been spent on this. He believes this flex is a decent compromise. Chair Melander closed the public hearing at 8:53 p.m. CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes December 4, 2019 Page 8 of 8 MOTION: Commissioner Burke moved, seconded by Commissioner Diekmann recommending amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map re -designating 23 acres of property, located at 8661 140th Street West from "PR" (Private Recreation) to "LDF" (Low Density Flex Residential). Ayes - 7 - Nays - 0. 5. LAND USE/ACTION ITEMS -NONE- 6. OTHER BUSINESS A. Review of upcoming schedule and other updates. Community Development Director Bruce Nordquist stated that the next regular Planning Commission meeting would take place Wednesday, December 18, 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 Schindler moved, seconded by Commissioner Dielunann to adjourn the meeting at 8:57 p.m. Ayes - 7 - Nays - 0. y Submitted, t Assistant Planning Commissi Tom Melander, Chair