Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-21-2018 Planning Commission Minutes MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 21,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. ROLL CALL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Chair John Thiesse, Commissioners Bob Erickson, Kevin Landgraver, Bruce Lemke, Dennis Libby,Jon Ressler, and Alternate J.B. Seals. Representing Staff were Community Development Director Jeremy Barnhart, City Planners Melanie Curtis and Laura Oakden, and Recorder Jackie Young. Chair Thiesse called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. NEW BUSINESS 1. APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OF April 16,2018 Landgraver moved,Lemke seconded,to approve the minutes of the Orono Planning Commission meeting of April 16,2018,as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0. 2. LA18-000039 CATHERINE MEYER,493 PARK AVENUE,VARIANCES, 6:31 P.M.— 6:35 P.M. Catherine Meyer, Applicant, was present. Curtis stated the applicant is requesting lot width and lot area variances in order to develop the vacant property and to take advantage of the Tier 3 hardcover level of 35 percent. Until recently,the property was made up of two separate PIDs. The combined property is a small lot which qualifies for buildability without area and width variances. The property owner recently combined the two PIDS into one property, which is still in process at Hennepin County. Plans have been submitted which meet all of the LR-1B district setbacks and reflect a proposed hardcover level of approximately 29 percent. In order to be able to exceed 25 percent up to the 35 percent limit,the lot area and width variances are required. Once the area and width variances are granted, any additional hardcover in the future would be limited to 35 percent. Staff finds that there are demonstrable practical difficulties supporting the lot area and lot width variance to develop the property. Staff recommends approval of the lot area and lot width variances. The Planning Commission had no questions for Staff. Catherine Meyer, Applicant, stated she is here to answer questions. Meyer indicated she has lived in her home for 40 years and that she is hoping to build a smaller house next door for herself and that her daughter and her family will be moving into her current home. Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 6:35 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Page 1of17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 21,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. 2. LA18-000039 CATHERINE MEYER,493 PARK AVENUE,VARIANCES, 6:31 P.M.— 6:35 P.M.—Continued Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 6:35 p.m. Thiesse commented the house is of a moderate size, fits the neighborhood, and that he does not have a problem with the application. Landgraver stated it is a prudent approach since the hardcover is below the allowable limit. Lemke moved,Landgraver seconded,to recommend approval of Application No.LA18-000041, Catherine Meyer,493 Park Avenue,subject to the two lots being combined. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0. 3. LA18-000040 MATTHEW AND ANGELA HOPPING,95 SMITH AVENUE, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT,6:35 P.M.—6:58 P.M. The applicant was not present. Curtis stated the applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit for grading over 500 cubic yards. Also as part of this plan the applicant is requesting City Council approval of a second driveway access onto Smith Avenue to access a lower level garage. The applicants are redeveloping the subject property and constructing a new residence. Their grading plan involves the import of approximately 250 cubic yards of soil with a total site disturbance balance of approximately 815 cubic yards. The new home is proposed to have an upper,main garage, as well as a lower garage to accommodate their desired number of vehicles on site. The proposed new home is more in keeping with the immediate neighborhood. Staff has provided an analysis of the conditional use permit criteria in the report and individual criteria can be discussed if the Planning Commission wishes. To accomplish the desired home and the tuck-under garage,the grade must be adjusted with fill in the area between the house and the road on the northeast side. The proposed home will have a first-floor garage elevated above the current grades by approximately seven feet and the lower level garage floor will be set within a foot or so of the existing grade. The property is situated along Smith Avenue. According to City Code, one driveway approach is permitted per property. In addition to the conditional use permit,the City Council will need to grant approval to allow the second driveway approach. This requirement is not within the zoning code and therefore a public hearing for this type of variance is not necessary, but the City Council shall consider the second driveway request when the conditional use permit is reviewed. Curtis stated the City has not received any written public comments regarding this application but that she did speak with a couple of the neighbors regarding the grading plan and that Staff can meet with them and the applicant to discuss the plan further if they desire. Planning Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit subject to the following conditions: Page 2 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 21,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. 3. LA18-000040 MATTHEW AND ANGELA HOPPING,95 SMITH AVENUE, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT,6:35 P.M.—6:58 P.M.—Continued 1. City Engineer and Watershed District shall approve the erosion control plan. 2. The street swept daily or as needed to keep debris off of Smith Avenue. 3. The applicant must conform to the City's and MCWD's erosion control regulations. 4. Only clean fill to be imported to the site. 5. Conformance with the City Engineer's requirements at the time of the building permit. 6. Hauling shall occur during allowed construction hours only Monday through Friday, 7 a.m.to 8 p.m. and between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. on weekends and holidays. 7. Contractor shall post a contact number and be able to respond to complaints in a timely fashion. Curtis noted the applicant is unable to be here this evening due to a family emergency. The Planning Commission had no questions for Staff. Dan Carlson, applicant's representative, stated the reason the extra dirt is going to be moved is because the current home is in front of the front yard setback and the house needs to be demolished and that area filled. Curtis noted they are proposing to raise the area adjacent to the street to accommodate the access on the lower level as well as having a main garage access. Carlson noted part of the fill is due to the old foundation. Thiesse pointed out it also appears there is a significant amount of fill for the driveway up behind the retaining wall. Carlson agreed some fill will be necessary for the driveway. Carlson stated there are already three other neighbors in the area that have a second driveway access. Curtis noted that would be an issue for the City Council and not the Planning Commission. Landgraver asked if the applicant is in agreement with the recommendations listed in the Staff report. Carlson indicated they are. Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 6:41 p.m. Ryan Blackwell, 80 Smith Avenue, stated they live across the street from this property and that they have three concerns. Blackwell asked where the second driveway is going to be in relation to his driveway. Blackwell noted there is a corner approximately 100 feet down the street from his driveway. Curtis illustrated the approximate location of the driveway and noted it will not be directly across from Mr. Blackwell's driveway. Curtis stated the applicant is not showing any grading in that area except for minimal grading and the removal of trees. Curtis noted the heavy lines on the plan depict the new grades. Page 3 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 21,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. 3. LA18-000040 MATTHEW AND ANGELA HOPPING,95 SMITH AVENUE, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT,6:35 P.M.—6:58 P.M.—Continued Blackwell stated in front of the house right now and all the way down the property line there is approximately a seven to eight-foot berm. Blackwell stated if the berm is capped at seven feet and the house is built on top of that, he has a concern that he will be in a valley since the other house is raised three feet. Curtis indicated the applicant is not proposing to grade anything beyond the driveway. Blackwell asked if the driveway will be cut through the berm. Curtis indicated it will be and that the grade beyond the driveway is not proposed to be raised. Thiesse asked if it is a single-story house. Curtis stated it is. Curtis stated the house itself will be taller on the property but the grade from the house to the road is not going to be changed. Thiesse noted the house footprint is at the right elevation,but the house floor will be pretty much at grade from where the house is currently sitting. Blackwell stated the road between the two homes is approximately 20 feet wide with no curbs and that he has a question for how they can go about getting some kind of parking plan in place or a plan for getting vehicles in and out. Blackwell indicated it is a safety concern given the children in the area. Blackwell commented he does not know what the precedent is with projects like this and whether a parking plan is created but that in his view that should be addressed. Blackwell stated there are a lot of issues on Lyman currently with vehicles that come in and that this winter the city plow ripped up all the sod near the corner and that he had to replace it this year. Blackwell stated he would rather have a good conversation about it and that he would like to understand the rules for moving vehicles in and out. Thiesse stated right now it would be nothing more than city enforcement and that construction traffic would only occur during the permitted construction hours. Blackwell asked whether there would be any limitations on whether parking would be allowed on both sides of the street. Thiesse noted if vehicles are parked on both sides, emergency vehicles might not be able to make it through. Barnhart stated typically in a variance application request parking is not addressed and that perhaps the neighbors could submit a petition to the City requesting parking be limited to one side of the street. Thiesse asked whether the conditional use permit will still happen if the City Council is not going to grant the second driveway access. Curtis stated the second access is very important to the applicant but that it is unclear whether there is another way to resolve that. Staff encouraged the applicant to explore another option and the applicant's Page 4 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 21,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. 3. LA18-000040 MATTHEW AND ANGELA HOPPING,95 SMITH AVENUE, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT,6:35 P.M.—6:58 P.M.—Continued engineer tried to come up with a different solution as well. Curtis stated the applicant did attempt to address it without having a second driveway. Carlson stated the second driveway is not feasible unless all the trees are removed due to the steepness of the area. Carlson indicated the applicant has a work van that he wants to park in the lower garage and that the proposed location is about the only spot the engineer could determine. Theodore Bonnett, 40 and 45 Smith Avenue, stated there is unpermitted work going on at the property this evening and that he has talked to the neighbors 40 to 60 times as well as spoken with Staff about various issues. Bonnett stated when he tries to get home,the construction workers look at him like he is the issue because they have to move their trucks. Bonnett stated in his view Barnhart has not done a good job at 60 Smith and that even though that project supposedly finished a year ago,things are still happening on the property. Bonnett stated he is just asking for some help to mitigate this from happening again. Bonnett stated when the police do show up,they do a great job,but that it took around 19 calls to the police station and staff before they came out. Bonnett stated he does not want to bother the Planning Commission about this problem and that he wanted to broker a solution even before work at 60 Smith started,which did not happen. Bonnett noted a fire truck or a police car would not be able to get down the street if there are cars parked on both sides,which is an issue, and that the neighbors are asking the Planning Commission for some help on it. Thiesse stated the Planning Commission is limited in what it can do and that the Planning Commission can recommend approval of the conditional use permit with specific conditions. Thiesse stated the Planning Commission has no control over people parking legally or illegally on the road and that they cannot incorporate that into a conditional use permit. Barnhart noted these are items that are related to another application. Bonnett stated those same issues could occur at this property, which is why he is here. Thiesse stated he is taking one instance and saying this applicant and contractor are going to operate the same way. Bonnett requested they incorporate the neighbors' concerns in their recommendations. Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 6:55 p.m. Landgraver stated the conditional use permit for the earth moving is fine. Libby stated it is very evident that a long-standing requirement of Orono would be met that anytime a new driveway is solved, adequate turnaround space is provided. Libby stated he does not see that having with the lower driveway. Page 5 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 21,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. 3. LA18-000040 MATTHEW AND ANGELA HOPPING,95 SMITH AVENUE, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT,6:35 P.M.—6:58 P.M.—Continued Curtis pointed out there is a hammerhead backup area provided for both driveways and that a turnaround is not required except for when accessing county roads or busier thoroughfares, which is when the City would require a turnaround. Thiesse stated he may have misspoke earlier and that the grade is going to be higher but not on the north end. Ressler noted what the Planning Commission is discussing is really the earth work. Landgraver moved,Ressler seconded,to recommend approval of Application No. LA18-000040, Matthew and Angela Hopping,95 Smith Avenue,granting of a conditional use permit,with the seven recommendations of Staff. Landgraver encouraged the neighbors to attend the City Council meeting where the driveway will be discussed. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0. 4. LA18-000043 LDK HOMES, 1509 LONG LAKE BOULEVARD,VARIANCES, 6:58 P.M.—7:07 P.M. Katie Bergstrom,Applicant, and Scott Hockentire, LDK Homes, were present. Oakden stated the applicant is requesting a side yard variance,a rear yard variance, lot area and lot width variances in order to build a new home on the property. The applicant plans to demolish the existing home. The existing home is located within the 75-foot lake yard setback and within the 50-foot rear yard setback. The new home will be located 17.9 feet from the rear property line and 10.3 feet from the west property line. The lot is unique for the LR-1A zoning district in that the bend of the shoreline creates a curved 75-foot lake yard setback which overlaps the 50-foot rear yard setback,thus eliminating a conforming building envelope on the lot. As a result, lot area and lot width variances are required. A rear setback variance is also requested. The applicant is proposing to build a deck on the lake side of the property 63 feet from the ordinary high water level and will be within the proposed footprint of the home. No public comments have been received to date. Staff finds that there are practical difficulties inherent to the lot area,width and setbacks. Staff has done a preliminary review of the height with the submitted documents. The proposed house looks to meet the 30-foot height requirements with the draft plans submitted. The applicant is not requesting any variances pertaining to height and the plans show they can meet this requirement. Also,the applicant is not proposing to add any stairs for lake access. In addition,the lot poses multiple challenges with steepness on the lot,the curved road, and the shoreline eliminating a building envelope. The Planning Commission should discuss the issues set forth in Staff report. Planning Staff recommends approval. Page 6 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 21,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. 4. LA18-000043 LDK HOMES, 1509 LONG LAKE BOULEVARD,VARIANCES, 6:58 P.M.—7:07 P.M.—Continued The Planning Commission had no questions for Staff. Scott Hockentire stated they would be able to answer any questions the Planning Commission may have. Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 7:03 p.m. Rachel Carpenter, 1540 Long Lake Boulevard, stated she would like to see the plans at some point. Carpenter asked whether the new roofline would be about the same height as the current home. Oakden stated she is unsure how the new roofline compares to the existing one but that the applicants are proposing to construct the house to meet the 30-foot requirement and are not requesting a variance to the height at this time. Carpenter asked if it will be a spec house. Bergstrom indicated it will not be. Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 7:04 p.m. Thiesse asked what the side yard setback is for the property at 1525. Oakden indicated that lot is a little more narrow, and due to its substandard width,they are allowed to have a 10-foot setback. Oakden stated this lot was measured at 116 feet, which means it would have an 11.6 foot setback. Seals noted there is a comment in Staff's report that the applicant will need to address how water will be managed. Seals asked whether that has been addressed yet. Oakden stated that is generally a standard comment from the City Engineer and a detailed review of the grading plan is typically done at the building permit review. Thiesse stated it appears the whole lot grades to the neighbor's lot,which is allowed. Thiesse noted the plan does have some arrows depicting how they are trying to keep some of the water on the subject lot but that is something that will have to be dealt with. Landgraver stated normally he would be concerned about the deck but that it is staying within the current footprint. Thiesse noted the house is also being pulled back from the lake. Lemke moved,Libby seconded,to recommend approval of Application No.LA18-000043, 1509 Long Lake Boulevard,granting of rear and side yard setback variances and lot area and lot width variances subject to Staffs comments. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0. Page 7 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 21,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. 5. LA18-000041 CITY OF ORONO,TEXT AMENDMENT—GATES,7:07 P.M.—7:33 P.M. Curtis stated Staff has been asked to review the regulations regarding entrance gates and the City's required 75 percent transparency minimum. Gates at driveways are permitted but must meet certain conditions, including a 5-foot setback from all property lines. Gates and entrance monuments are permitted up to eight feet in height and fences are allowed up to 42 inches in height adjacent to the street. A 6-foot fence is allowed in a yard abutting a county highway on a lakeshore lot. Fences may be 100 percent opaque. Staff has provided a draft ordinance for Planning Commission review and comment. The draft ordinance removes the requirement for transparency. In addition,the draft ordinance proposes a formatting modification for gates to be permitted where entrance monuments do not exist. In these instances gates would not be permitted to extend higher than the permitted fence. Thiesse noted the requirement for a building permit has been struck in the draft ordinance and asked whether it is still required. Curtis indicated she added it as Item i under Item 9 and eliminated it under Item 10f(i) in the draft ordinance. Curtis stated the gate does not require a building permit but monuments do. Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 7:10 p.m. Gerald Ferrer, 1560 Hunter Drive, stated he is building a house at 980 Heritage Lane and that he wanted to add a gate to the driveway. Ferrer indicated in the beginning he did not know the opaqueness rules and came up with some designs that were then shown to Mr. Barnhart. Ferrer stated he would like to know why the gates needs to be 25 percent opaque and 75 percent open since the gate is for security and privacy. Thiesse stated the Planning Commission will be discussing that this evening and making a recommendation to the City Council. Ferrer stated at certain cases he can see the need for some openness but at his property all someone has to do is walk around the monuments. Ferrer asked whether the requirements will be changed. Barnhart stated the direction from the City Council is to remove that requirement and that it will likely be on the June 11 City Council agenda. Ferrer stated he was not sure whether it has something to do with people possibly getting hurt but that technology has evolved and that most gates will have sensors preventing the gate from closing on someone. Ferrer noted gates also have to hinge from behind the back so when the gate closes,nothing can be crunched between the gate and the pillar. Libby stated he recently dealt with a gate in his neighborhood and that in talking to traffic engineers and police officers,they indicated the opacity is sometimes really more important for line of sight for people turning out. Libby noted there are a lot of people walking in this area and the opaqueness makes it easier for drivers to see pedestrians. Ferrer noted the gates have to open in toward the residence. Page 8 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 21,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. 5. LA18-000041 CITY OF ORONO,TEXT AMENDMENT—GATES,7:07 P.M.—7:33 P.M. —Continued Libby stated it was more about visibility and how monuments could potentially obstruct someone's line of sight. Libby commented there are a lot of components and moving targets when dealing with safety. Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 7:15 p.m. Ressler asked if these rules are unique to Orono. Curtis indicated some cities will not allow gates and other cities require a certain opacity and that it tends to be a community preference. Curtis noted she included some information from neighboring communities in the packet. Thiesse noted someone can run a fence right up to a monument that is 100 percent opaque. Thiesse stated in his view limiting the amount of opaqueness is a good idea. Seals asked whether the police and fire departments have weighed in on this. Curtis stated the police and fire departments have indicated they want to be able to access the gate in the event of an emergency. Curtis noted the lock box requirement is not changing under the draft ordinance. Landgraver stated to his understanding the original intent was to prevent a monotony along the streets and that during the Comprehensive Plan update,they have heard a lot about the openness of Orono. Landgraver questioned whether the City should be encouraging people to construct that type of barricade and that perhaps keeping some transparency or visibility would be a good idea. Landgraver asked who is going to measure the opacity and what will determine the right amount. Landgraver stated he does not have a good answer for that. Lemke commented he would like to see a little visibility to the gate since it helps to improve the appearance of the gate. Lemke stated the 25 percent makes sense for the opaqueness. Thiesse noted the City is not stopping someone from making the gate more transparent and that the ordinance would just allow somebody to have a little more privacy. Thiesse asked how many gates there are in Orono. Curtis indicated she did not do an inventory but that there are quite a few. Ressler stated he is okay with it being a lesser number and that requiring a gate to have 25 percent openness into a property where there is a privacy fence around the entire property still affords a lot of privacy. Ferrer stated in his situation it is open area with a driveway that has a gate and that it should be something that is subjective since every situation is different rather than just black and white. Barnhart stated the City has to make the language black and white rather than subjective. Barnhart commented this might be a little bit like a solution in search of a problem. Staff has provided some research from other cities and it is all over the board. Barnhart stated the Planning Commission can debate whether it should be 35, 50, or 75 percent, but that he would like to avoid a situation where the Page 9 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 21,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. 5. LA18-000041 CITY OF ORONO,TEXT AMENDMENT—GATES,7:07 P.M.—7:33 P.M. —Continued City does not know what they are trying to achieve. Barnhart stated the direction from the City Council was to remove sections from the Code that were not needed. Thiesse stated he appreciates the explanation. Ressler stated he has these thoughts about driving down a narrow road with trucks coming in and out and there are all these privacy fences. Ressler stated from his perspective it is good to have a little bit of visibility but that he is also in agreement with simplifying, which might be somewhat conflicted. Thiesse asked how far off the right-of-way the gate has to be. Curtis indicated monuments must be five feet off the traveled roadway and property lines and gates should be 10 feet from the traveled roadway. Libby stated this is a neighborhood that is heavily wooded and there really is not any fencing except for some split rail fences. Libby asked whether this is a privacy issue. Thiesse noted the ordinance would be city-wide. Lemke commented someone can always request a variance. Barnhart noted it is hard to argue practical difficulty on an accessory structure. Seals stated he likes the idea of a simpler code and that perhaps the City should have some trust in the citizens that they will do the right thing. Erickson noted there was mention about emergency access and that he was wondering if gates can be set up mechanically to allow access and what happens if there is a power outage. Curtis stated the fire department requested a lock box at the time the original ordinance was adopted and that requirement would remain. Ferrer stated there is also something called a YELP mode and that the gate will open up if the siren is loud enough. Thiesse commented 25 percent from 100 percent is a big step. Landgraver stated the reason for rules and regulations is to prevent ambiguity and to require people to go through a process. Landgraver stated he is in agreement with simplifying the ordinance but that he is not okay with just simply rolling the dice and seeing what happens. Ressler agreed with Commissioner Landgraver. Thiesse stated he would rather than visit the issue a year from now to see if there are any issues. Page 10 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 21,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. 5. LA18-000041 CITY OF ORONO,TEXT AMENDMENT—GATES,7:07 P.M.—7:33 P.M. —Continued Lemke asked what prompted this ordinance change. Barnhart indicated it was due to the request of the gentleman in the audience as well as the Mayor, who has asked Staff to take a look at it. Thiesse stated his recommendation to the Council would be that there still be some opaqueness but that he is not sure of the number. Landgraver suggested the Planning Commission recommend approving the draft ordinance but maintaining some level of transparency. Landgraver suggested the City Council come up with a number they feel is appropriate. Landgraver moved,Ressler seconded,to recommend approval of Application No. LA18-000041, City of Orono Text Amendment, Gate Opacity,with language being incorporated allowing an opacity level no greater than 75 percent. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 1, Seals Opposed. 6. LA18-000042 CITY OF ORONO, TEXT AMENDMENT—PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE DISTANCE AND SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENTS, 7:34 P.M.—7:45 P.M. Oakden stated Staff was requested to look at changing the notice requirements for a public hearing. Currently notices are sent to property owners 350 feet from the subject property. The Mayor proposes 500 feet. State Statute requires notification of property owners within 350 feet for zoning ordinance amendments. Within the zoning and subdivision chapters, the City also requires a public hearing for all conditional use permits, variances,rezoning requests, comprehensive plan amendments,wetland and subdivision requests. The intent of the notification radii is to inform those property owners that are more likely to be directly impacted by a proposal. All interested parties can learn about the project through the City's official paper or through the City's listserve. Having a larger notification area would increase the change for more public input. The Planning Commission should consider and evaluate the typical amount of public input they receive for public hearing applications and how the residents hear about the projects. Other items to consider include the increased cost for postage and mailings and the impact an application might have on an abutting neighbor versus a neighbor located 500 feet away. Oakden noted she did include some examples in the packet depicting the current notification area and the expanded notification area. Landgraver asked how this change would impact Staff. Landgraver asked how likely it would be that Staff will be receiving more calls. Oakden stated it is likely Staff will get more calls and that the Planning Commission will receive additional input but that she is not sure of a specific percentage. Page 11 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 21,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. 6. LA18-000042 CITY OF ORONO,TEXT AMENDMENT—PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE DISTANCE AND SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENTS,7:34 P.M.—7:45 P.M.—Continued Seals asked if there is any expectation for increased processing time. Oakden stated the notice mailing is provided by the applicant at this time and that there will be some Staff time to print the additional postcards as well as the postage. Libby stated considering lot sizes, in his view the 500 feet would be more inclusive. Thiesse commented he has some difficulty with expanding the notification area and that the City tries hard to get people involved but that it does not always work. Thiesse stated in his view people in the neighborhood have an obligation to know what is going on in their neighborhood. Thiesse stated he likes getting people involved but that he does not like going beyond what the state statute requires. Thiesse noted the City just backed off of their wetland ordinances for that very reason. Ressler stated as a variance applicant from two years ago, he had no idea who some of the people were that were on the list. Ressler stated 350 feet goes a long way when the property is on the lake or in a smaller lot neighborhood. Ressler noted the applicants are also required to post signs that say they are applying for a permit. Ressler stated unless there is an epidemic of people saying they have not been informed,he does not see the need to increase the area. Landgraver noted there have been instances where people did get the notice but still said they were not informed about it. Landgraver stated there will always be instances of people asking why someone did not tell them about it and that he is in agreement with Chair Thiesse that the City should follow the state guidelines. Landgraver questioned what the return on the investment will be,noting that more people offering opinions on something, especially when it comes to a small project, might not always be the best. Lemke stated increasing it to 500 feet is not going to guarantee people will pay attention to the notice. Landgraver stated the most pushback he remembers for not receiving notice was the Dayton property off of County Road 6. Landgraver asked whether Staff have the discretion to expand it. Curtis stated Staff does not expand it because they do not want to make a decision on one project versus another. Curtis stated on larger projects they will erect a City sign. Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 7:45 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 7:45 p.m. Lemke moved,Ressler seconded,to recommend denial of Application No.LA18-000042,City of Orono Text Amendment: Notification Distance for Public Hearings.VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0. Page 12 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 21,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. 7. LA18-000044 CITY OF ORONO, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 2040 UPDATE,7:46 P.M.—8:30 P.M. Barnhart noted this item is intended to apprise the Planning Commission on the proposed changes to the City's Comprehensive Plan but that he is not asking the Planning Commission to approve the 2040 amendment at this time. Barnhart stated since April of 2017, a committee that was put together by the City Council has met monthly and reviewed specific chapters of the existing Comprehensive Plan and directed Staff to make certain changes. The committee operated under three primary goals: 1. Preserve Orono's rural character and natural resources. Keep rural areas rural and not add unnecessary traffic. 2. Meet the Metropolitan Council requirements that are established for all cities under their jurisdiction. 3. Improve the readability of the Comprehensive Plan. On April 26,the Committee authorized the publication of the plan for public comment, which officially commenced May 1. The public comment period includes the distribution of the plan to affected communities. Those agencies are allowed six months to provide comment. The plan was distributed to 26 affected jurisdictions, including the Conservation District, Hennepin County Transportation Department, and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. The City has received one comment back already from the City of Plymouth, who had no recommended changes. An open house was held on May 10 and comments were invited but none were received. Barnhart noted the open house was not as well attended as Staff would like but that there will be another open house in the fall. Barnhart stated he is looking for authorization to submit the update to the Metropolitan Council for their preliminary review so their comments can be addressed. The final plan is due by December 31 of next year. Barnhart noted the key piece that most people are interested in is land use and that the committee and Staff tried to not make wholesale changes on the land use side. Currently the Metropolitan Council recognizes some areas of Orono as undeveloped, which is the light green color on the map, and Orono looks at those as rural areas and will not be changing those. Thiesse asked if the Metropolitan Council considers non-buildable lots as undeveloped. Barnhart indicated Staff does not go to that level of detail and that he is not sure whether the Metropolitan Council makes that distinction. Barnhart noted there is not a huge change in land use between the 2030 and 2040 plan and that most of the land use changes have occurred in the northern area of the City. Two of those changes are consistent with recent amendments that have already been approved. The third change is located at the corner of Willow and Wayzata Boulevard where some high-density residential was introduced next to Orono Woods and another high-density area was introduced south of Kelley Page 13 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 21,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. 7. LA18-000044 CITY OF ORONO, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 2040 UPDATE,7:46 P.M.—8:30 P.M.—Continued Parkway. Barnhart noted the City does not have to approve the first high-density project that is proposed and that any proposed project must be consistent with the City's regulations. Barnhart noted another area of high interest is the Navarre area. In the 2030 plan,the brown color on the map depicts mixed use. Shadywood Villas was recently approved on the south side of Shadywood Road. Also in the area is the Freshwater Business Center and a vacant lot. The 2040 plan still designates commercial at the main corner of Shadywood and Shoreline,which will likely be the component of a redevelopment process. Also in the area is medium residential density around the townhomes. The 2040 plan removes the residential from the south side of Shadywood Road and has been changed to commercial. The 2040 plan also introduces some additional residential near the fire station on the north and south side. No other new residential areas were added. Barnhart stated the Metropolitan Council predicts a certain amount of growth within each city and each city is supposed to provide an opportunity for that growth over the next 20 years. Those opportunities for growth were identified in the 2008 plan in the form of a planned development site map. That site map identified areas for potential growth and are outlined in heavy red on the map. It included Orono Preserve, Eisinger Meadows,the area around the fire station, and the Irvin Jacobs property. Area E on the map depicts areas that the City anticipated connection to the sanitary sewer system. Barnhart noted whenever the City extends the MUSA boundary,the density must be at least three units per acre. Barnhart noted there has been some discussion over the last ten years or so regarding areas that could be guided to serve as a buffer to meet the Metropolitan Council's requirement relating to MUSA. Originally Eisinger Meadows was guided to be 15 units an acre but came in at five units an acre and some of the other projects have been less than what they were originally guided for. As a result,the City's buffer has been significantly reduced. A consequence of that may be that some of the properties that would like to connect to the MUSA may be denied by the Metropolitan Council. Barnhart noted in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan,the Navarre area has no new developments south or west of Shadywood Road. The green areas depict the two-acre lots and 690 Brown Road has been added to the area. Barnhart noted the City has already received some sketch plan concepts over the last couple of years for that parcel and it is anticipated it will be developed at some point in the next ten years. The Dumas Orchard has been kept the same and three residential parcels along Kelley Parkway have been added. Through the review, Staff and the committee have attempted to identify development sites where growth is anticipated but growth is not limited to those areas. The committee also looked at impacts to infrastructure over the next ten years. The chart identifies the anticipated areas of growth as required by the Metropolitan Council. The City is projected to have 523 new sewered households by 2030 and 330 more sewered households after 2040. Barnhart stated in the 2040 plan,the City has provided an opportunity for those homes but that they are not obligated to approve any development that does not meet the City's requirements. Barnhart stated at this time he is looking for authorization to move it forward to the City Council and that the Planning Commission will have the next four or five months to review the Comprehensive Plan in more detail. Changes will be made in October based on feedback and then the plan will be back before the Planning Commission in November. Page 14 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 21,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. 7. LA18-000044 CITY OF ORONO,COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 2040 UPDATE,7:46 P.M.—8:30 P.M.—Continued Landgraver asked how Staff would like feedback on minor comments. Barnhart requested all suggestions be sent directly to him and that he will make those changes in October once he has received all the feedback. Landgraver asked if there is a document that details what changes there are between the two plans. Lemke commented the public is more concerned about what is changing rather than reviewing the entire plan. Barnhart stated he does not believe he can do that since a new document was created based largely on the old plan Lemke asked how the plan will be presented to the public. Barnhart indicated it is in the public realm right now and that people can submit written comments. Landgraver asked how community interest can be generated in this update. Barnhart stated the challenge is that it is hard for a resident to understand how it impacts them, which is the reason for the maps. Barnhart stated he does not believe most people care how Orono complies with the sewer regulations and that a committee of 13 Orono residents was formed to help review the plan and recommend various changes. Staff and the committee have identified what anticipated land use changes there will be. Landgraver stated when you look around Orono, affordable housing is not real dominant and there does not appear to be a real plan for developing affordable housing. Barnhart pointed out affordable housing is often dictated upon the price of the land and that two options to provide for affordable housing are, one,the City purchase the property or,two,provide tax increment financing. Barnhart stated Orono is not likely to use those options unless they absolutely have to and that he sees the land value as a huge deterrent to affordable housing. Barnhart stated putting affordable housing in the middle of nowhere does not really achieve anything since more public services would also be needed in those areas and those currently do not exist. Barnhart stated the City has to provide the opportunity for affordable housing. Lemke stated Mr. Barnhart's explanation was very helpful and that he was wondering how that can be communicated to the general public. Barnhart stated he is open to any way the Comprehensive Plan update can be promoted. Seals suggested a YouTube video be placed on the City's website detailing the changes. Landgraver stated if an area is being changed,the City could perhaps notify the residents of that area within a certain distance and that they would then be targeting an audience that is subjected to change. Page 15 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 21,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. 7. LA18-000044 CITY OF ORONO, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 2040 UPDATE, 7:46 P.M.—8:30 P.M.—Continued Thiesse stated there is also a responsibility of the public to become involved. Thiesse stated in his view the plan is good and he appreciates the work of the committee and Staff. Thiesse asked why the Metropolitan Council is looking to have more sewered properties. Barnhart indicated the Metropolitan Council anticipates those properties are more likely to be developed. Seals asked whether the City expects comment back from the Metropolitan Council. Barnhart stated they do and that he is preliminarily submitting it to make sure nothing was missed that might delay final approval further on down the road. Landgraver asked who in the City reviews the other cities' Comprehensive Plan updates. Barnhart indicated he would do the initial review and then it would go to the City Administrator. Barnhart stated they are primarily looking for any changes that would impact Orono. Thiesse asked what would happen if he has a piece of property that is deemed open space and it is rezoned. Barnhart stated a number of parks and open spaces have been identified in the plan and they are often permanent uses but that designation can be changed if the land is privately owned and the owner would like to change it. Barnhart noted that is what the Comprehensive Plan Amendment process is about. Thiesse commented the City kind of puts the burden on the property owner to change it. Barnhart stated the property owner can request it be amended if it is zoned parks and open spaces but that the City's zoning ordinance must match the Comprehensive Plan per state statute. Landgraver stated if the City is re-guiding someone's property a different way,they should probably know about it and that it would be better to hear that feedback now. Barnhart stated the City has a right to guide property the way the City deems appropriate but that he agrees with Commissioner Landgraver. Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 8:27 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 8:27 p.m. Lemke moved,Landgraver seconded,to recommend the Comprehensive Plan Update be forwarded to the Metropolitan Council. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0. Page 16 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 21,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. 8. UPDATE ON MAY 14,2018,CITY COUNCIL MEETING Barnhart reported the City Council approved the following applications at their May 14 meeting: • The Jeff Martineau variance application was approved. Council Member Printup had a comment regarding on-street construction parking given the narrow streets. Staff did some research to confirm the Council cannot put a condition on something that is unrelated to the variance. • The Mark Stipakov final plat amendment was approved on Consent. • Eisinger Meadows received a one-year extension on their preliminary plat. • The Orono Apartments application was approved. There were no public comments. • The text amendment relating to definitions was approved on Consent. • The conditional use permit for 3800 Shoreline for a dog kennel was approved without comments. 9. PLANNING COMMISSION LIAISON FOR JUNE 11,2018,COUNCIL MEETING- BRUCE LEMKE 10. OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION None PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS None ADJOURNMENT Landgraver moved,Lemke seconded,to adjourn the Orono Planning Commission meeting at 8:33 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0. ATTEST: C 7671,,Y1-6 John Thiesse, Chair (r Page 17 of 17