[Music] [Music] good evening I call the August 7th 2024 Apple Valley Planning Commission meeting to order first item of business is the approval of the agenda any changes from staff good evening uh Madame chair members of commissioner we have no changes for you right now move approval second approval made by um commissioner Schindler and seconded by commissioner scanland any discussion if not all those in favor say I I oppose n motion carries next item of business is the approval uh new item of business it's the approval of the consent agenda consent agenda items are considered routine and will be enacted with a single motion without discussion unless a Comm commissioner or a citizen request to have any item separately considered it will then be moved to land use action items for consideration can I get an approval for the minutes of July 17th 2024 regular meeting so moved second made by commissioner scanland and seconded by commissioner Schindler any discussion if not all those in favor say I I I oppose name motion carries this brings us to public hearings and there are no public hearings tonight so then we are to number five land use action items and this is Cedar Valley Learning Center setback variant and our presenter tonight for the first time on the Planning Commission is Sydney stro yep did I say it right yep welcome thank you good evening chair CTS members of the commission ISD 196 is requesting a variance at Cedar Valley Learning Center located at 14 420 Glenda Drive Cedar Valley Learning Center provides education opportunities to all ages children to adult specifically their request is to consider a variance to reduce the building setback from Cedar Avenue from the required 50 ft to 38 ft to for a vestibule addition the property is located near the northwest corner of Cedar Avenue and 145th Street just north of Quick Trip this area provides a closer look at the property with the proposed VES location indicated on the east side of the building the property is zoned lb limited business and the setac requirement for Cedar Avenue as mentioned is 50 ft the building is located in the Southeast portion of the property it is slightly angled from the property line so that the corner of the building abuts the 50 foot stepb back and then begins to shift further to orient this plan the north side of the property the north side of the building is near the bottom of the slide and then the East Side along Cedar is uh towards the left side of the slide there is a represent representative from World architect here tonight who may be able to walk you through this building lay layout if you have any questions later but for a general overview um here is the North End entrance um as noted in the staff report this entrance provides direct access to the elevator and the staircase for students and visitors are even let into the main area um where the classrooms are it has been stated in the applicant letter that this is a primary security concern as an education facility and prevents adequate visitor management an existing secondary entrance is located on the east side of the building this entrance does not provide direct access to the elevator or the staircases the district is proposing to construct a secure vestibule to reestablish the East entrance the applicant letter states that any addition to this side of the property would encroach into the setback area as the existing building is already located so closely to the 50-ft setback the proposed vesu as shown on the slide will encroach up to 12 feet into that setback area the addition will have a footprint of50 3 Square ft the new combined building coverage will meet The Limited business district building coverage standard the elevation indicates that all exterior materials and siding will match the existing building this is an image of the existing conditions on the east side of the building taken from Cedar Avenue you can also see the existing trees located near the property line these trees are not planned to be removed from construction the vestibule and this has been noted as part of the findings and uh conditions for reference to the surrounding area and the character of the Cedar Avenue Corridor multiple other buildings have setbacks that have been reduced from 50 ft this list is the list shown is not a complete review of every property along Cedar Avenue but rather a preliminary look at more recent projects that have reduced setbacks the reduced setbacks are for for various reasons for instance the Legends located in a plan development have a setback requirement of only 20 ft Huntington Bank formerly TCF which is also located in The Limited business district has an approved variance for reduced building setback from 50 to 10 ft in terms of variances we look at two considerations when reviewing requests the definition of practical difficulties including the reasonableness of a request the unique circumstances of a property and the character of the surrounding area we also look at factors to determine practical difficulties including special conditions of the structure or land of the subject property the proposed variance is not contrary to the intent of the zoning ordinance the unique circumstances uh are not a result of the owner or applicant variance is not merely a convenience and it is the minimum variance necessary as for recommended findings uh I just want to know that the findings have been revised from the staff report from the staff report and the updated findings have been provided to you tonight the main update being the addition of finding number nine for a brief overview the findings lay out the requirements of the lb Zone the existing conditions of the site and the building including the lack of security and visitor management at the current entrance the more favorable conditions of the East entrance and how the reduced setac will not alter the character of the Cedar Avenue corridor the finding also note that no significant trees are planned to be removed and then lastly the addition of number nine which states that security and visitor management needs of the Learning Center cannot be met at the existing north entrance due to the elevator and primary staircase at the entrance which allow unrestricted access for staff students and authorized visitors the existing East entrance can provide security and visitor management by constructing a VES Edition a secure vesu Edition on the east side of property cannot be constructed without encroaching into the 50ft building setback from Cedar Avenue because of the proximity of the existing building to the setback these facts constitute a practical difficulty warranting the stepback variance if the Planning Commission concurs staff suggests a a recommendation be made tonight please note that the recommended motion has been updated from the staff report and is reflected on this slide and with that I can take any questions we also have a representative from Architects here tonight Commissioners any questions for Sydney first of all before the applicant so I think the applicant if you wanted to come up I have a couple of questions I know so explain to me why you can't add that ex to the entrance on the North side versus the east side I mean I understand that all the staircases and elevators and stuff like that are there but if you're building on an addition why can't you do it on the North side sure thank you um so physically the vesu could go on to the north side the challenge is that managing staff are interior of the building so even if it were built there it would function the same as it does today where visitors would be buzzed in and be able to access vertical circulation prior to engaging with staff so the the intent is that staff would engage with a visitor prior to allowing them into the sure understand like um I'm guessing you have like a welcome desk there or something that somebody lets them in like they do schools I for one know those very well because I worked them quite often very similar to many of the school editions that happened I think in 2018 yeah so you still couldn't have that in the entryway on the North side have a desk in there and not without increasing the addition to the size where you could move those staff into it which again would as we put in our application would be feasibly um it'd be more expensive cost prohibitive than doing it on the on the side yeah and I actually didn't know that school district 196 own that but do you have students there at same time that the students are in regular class and stuff no this building functions much differently it's basically Community Education so it has um adult basic education there's uh ECFE so early childhood family education so there's visitors coming kind of all day during the day even after hours um they have people using the the building so it's it's not your typical K12 schedule got it okay thank you uh commissioner scandin Madam chair Sydney could you bring up the slide that shows the layout of the building that might get just give a visual aid to to go along with the explanation that we just had for anybody that's is your questions for the applicant you want to get back up no I mean it just I just thought it would help if we brought it up it just explains the fact of uh having it on the north side the issue with um the staircase and the elevator everything condensed in that small space and compared to sir I was just thinking that the building if you put a building in front of there thank you anybody else um commissioner Halas U just a question for for you in regards to the the north side entrance is that going to be changed at all closed uh eliminated so the north side would would have to remain purely from a building egis standpoint we can't we can't just lose those doors um I imagine they would continue to allow staff to use uh you know badged and card read access to to get in another building uh but visitors would purely use the um the new entrance new the East Side other going to be any changes to Lighting in certain times of the day that no there's no other proposed changes to the project besides the VES Edition there as you can see in the plan there will be a slight sidewalk modification there's an existing Trail there that'll be be slightly modified around the addition but other than that there aren't any other site modifications parking lot or lighting or anything like that okay you commissioner Mahal just on the North side there um it looks like where the entrance is is is that the elevator to the immediate left there correct the elevator is right here okay and then those are open stairs to the right these are open stairs and currently staff are positioned in this portion of the building as part of the project they will simply be moved to this part of the building so that they can directly manage that that entrance okay so with respect to the existing entry way on the North side you couldn't I mean even if you could add a card reader to the elevator to restrict access you'd still have an open stairwell correct okay good commissioner scanlin Madam chair um question with adding this with the the the new vesu is there going to be some type of um signage and direction to show people how to because it's not real um yeah we have obviously these plans are preliminary for the purposes of the variant but definitely as part of the project the owner has ISC 196 has indicated that there does need to be wayfinding signage from the parking lot to the main entrance that would be part of the the project once we get it developed at that point and and I guess my only other comment and it was already asked about lighting that if if with this being this change being and that there's not dark spots or what have you for like you said earlier there's this is being used um throughout the day and into the evening and so forth especially in the winter time where it's dark that this is well lit so I guess that was one thing that um um that Sydney I guess I'll ask you to just keep that in mind as you go forward with this to take a look at it won't hamper anything we're doing here the rest of the um with this tonight but it's just a thought that I have the yeah we can certainly we can certainly evaluate existing lighting along this because this is a public walk trail through here so we can evaluate what the existing lighting conditions are and make sure we're doing whatever we need to do at our entrance as well yep thank you of course shate commissioner Mahal just another quick I'm not sure if it's it's for you or for staff and and whether this is actually a good question or not but it looks looks like if you'd still end up with the 38t setback with the addition um I'm just with respect to the other variances that have been granted um with setbacks um I I would imagine just kind of my well is it true that some of the other variances bring you much closer to uh to Cedar Avenue than than this proposal I think or in other words much I guess shorter setbacks have been been allowed at other locations is that a fair assessment chair CTS commissioner MD um that is a fair assessment there have been um closer setbacks or reduced setbacks um for instance like the legend is 20 feet um t uh Hunting Bank formul TCF was reduced to 10 from 50 um cider Ridge has a reduced setback to 25 ft I can go through them all if you'd like that that pretty much answers my question and I guess with respect to the setback request um is there any consultation with Department of Transportation or um any other Highway related entity do they have a say in that or is the setback really outside of the sort of the operational needs of the roadway and more of uh a concern of the city does that make sense at all it's not it's not compromising in any way shape or form the transportation Corridor that that Cedar Avenue represents chair Kur commissioner Mahal um I do not believe that we've ever had to consult with um Minnesota Department of Transportation for these types of Varian requests um they're not within the right of way they're still on their um property uh for instance Chick-fil-A I we did not consult with um the Min soda Department of Transportation um I can defer to other staff if that's a city engineer you want to answer that Madam chair members of the commission um Sydney's correct um bit of a semantic but um Minnesota Department of Transportation would not review since these are these are County Roads we do not really consult with Dakota County um other than potentially just sending them um you know the projects that we have in the works but it is you know the planning's uh perview to review that okay thanks for the explanation and that was just my concern with respect to whether it's the state whether it's the county whether it's a city road if we're outside of the the the concerns of of that regulatory governmental entity then I'm okay with that's I just wanted to confirm that thank you commissioner sandal Madam chair um S I don't know if this a question for you or for the applicant but um one thing that the applicant said that caught my ear was that it would be cost prohibitive to do a bigger entrance on the North side um to make that work but one of our economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties so I just I'm curious are there other reasons that that North Side doing a bigger entrance would not work I just want to make sure that we're yeah m would you like to ask so to do it on the North side we would have to I think I mentioned this we'd have to consider moving um staff into a potential addition on the North side and at that point we would be getting into the parking lot as well so we'd potentially be losing parking spaces and affecting traffic flow on that side so that's another constraint on the North side is based on how close the parking is to the building um so I don't know if that answer not just cost not just cost no it's definitely existing um parking facilities would be impacted as well okay thank you uh chair CTS could we get the applicant to uh address provide his name and address for the record please y my name is Sean Kelly uh my address is uh 65251 33rd Street West Apple Valley thank you a resident even any other well commissioner Schindler I just wanted to say that I I feel that this meets the definition of the Practical difficulties and I'm comfortable with what they're asking I just figured I'd wait appreciate that okay this time I don't think there's any other questions what is the consideration of the board Madam chair I recommend approval of a variance reducing the setback for a vestib addition from 50 ft to 38 ft from to 38 ft from C Avenue based on the updated findings 1-9 in subject to the uh conditions listed in the staff report second okay that motion was made by commissioner scanland and second by commissioner Schindler any discussion if not all those in favor signify by saying I I I oppose nay motion carries thank you welcome that brings us to other business and Tim benetti thank you chair CTS and members of the commission uh just a reminder our next meeting is uh August 21st 2024 we do have an item schedule for that night uh you may also hopefully you're aware if not you're aware uh that will be Kathy bodmer City planner's last meeting uh she is retiring uh September 6 did not know okay so you will be cordially invited uh to a party for her probably scheduled for the 6th on the Friday uh so uh it's also tradition that the planning chair has to bring treats for for the night so not to put pressure on our our our chair uh next one is September they can be made they don't have to be purchase exactly okay uh September 4th will be the follow-up meeting and also our Council on the 8th which is tomorrow and the 22nd and with that uh available for any questions uh just a very quick recap of night to unite last night hope I don't know if any of you had or participated in some uh neighborhood events but we had a great turnout uh great feedback uh we we we we provided a at our department head meeting this afternoon or this morning kind of a an update of who went uh surprising very limited complaints a lot of compliments so we like to hear that politics were left off the table even with those who were em bibing in some alcoholic drinks at their parties but and we had some really good turnouts and some real fun uh uh pictures taken so uh if you participated uh thank you and uh if if not please do so next year it's a great event to get to know your neighbors and and feel free to host it I our our new planner did uh at her own uh new neighborhood so anyway that's all I have it is amazing I saw many neighborhoods last night with a lot of people in people's front yard so it's always maybe we should have it more than once a year who knows do I have a motion to adjourn so moved second motion made by commissioner scanland second by commissioner Schindler all those in favor say I I oppose nay this meeting has adjourned than [Music] [Music]