Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-15-2018 Planning Commission Minutes , MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,October 15,2018 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, Chad Olson, and Jon Ressler. Representing Staff were Community Development Director Jeremy Barnhart, City Planners Melanie Curtis and Laura Oakden, and Recorder Jackie Young. Mayor Dennis Walsh was present. Chair Thiesse called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 17,2018 Libby moved,Lemke seconded,to approve the minutes of the Orono Planning Commission meeting of September 17,2018,as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0. NEW BUSINESS 2. LA18-000081 BRIAN HAAS ON BEHALF OF JEFFERY GOSSEN,4260 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH,VARIANCES,6:31 P.M.—6:38 P.M. Jeffrey Gossen,Applicant; and Justin Hultman, Contractor,were present. Oakden stated the applicant is requesting east and west side yard setback variances to allow for a home addition to the existing structure. The detached garage west of the existing home is proposed to be removed from the site. The applicant proposes an attached garage in its place. The current detached garage sits roughly 38 feet from the west side property line. The new home addition and attached garage is proposed to sit 37 feet from the west side of the property. The applicant is also proposing a covered deck off the rear of the home. The deck addition is shown to encroach in the east side yard setback. The current home sits 32 feet from the east side property line. The covered deck addition is proposed to sit 42 feet from the east side property line. The property is nonconforming in width and size. Staff finds there are practical difficulties inherent to the property due to the nonconforming lot being less than half the required width. This creates a challenging building envelope in the RR-1A zoning district. Pertaining to the east side proposed encroachment,the applicant is not asking to be closer than the principal structure in this side yard. The addition will be in the rear of the home that will not alter the current side yard. The Planning Commission should discuss the proposed practical difficulties. If the Commission agrees with the findings, Staff would recommend a motion recommending approval for the proposed variances. Oakden displayed an aerial photograph of the area showing the detached garage,the existing house, and the neighboring properties. r MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,October 15,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. The Planning Commission had no questions for Staff. Jeff Gossen, Applicant, stated he is here to answer questions. Thiesse asked how deep the new garage will be. Justin Hultman, Contractor, indicated the garage will be 28 feet in depth. Thiesse asked if there will be stairs on the end. Hultman stated there will be stairs on the inside. Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 6:36 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 6:36 p.m. Thiesse asked if anyone has any concerns with the proposal. Landgraver commented this is a bad lot and the applicants are trying to make the best out of a bad situation. Landgraver moved,Olson seconded,to recommend Approval of Application LA18-000081,Brian Haas on behalf of Jeffery Gossen,4260 Sixth Avenue,granting of east and west side yard setback variances. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0. 3. LA18-000083 SCOTT ENGLAND ON BEHALF OF BARBARA LUPIENT,3220 AND 3200 WAYZATA BOULEVARD WEST, SKETCH PLAN,6:38 P.M.—8:22 P.M. Scott England, Applicant,was present. Barnhart noted this is a sketch plan review for a proposed development of a 288-unit apartment complex over two properties located on the south side of Lake Classen and on the north side of Wayzata Boulevard. Both parcels are zoned RR-1B and guided for rural residential. The parcels are not located within MUSA and therefore are not eligible for sanitary sewer services without an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. Lake Classen is a Natural Environment Lake,which requires a 150-foot setback for all structures. The plans provided by the developer show four new apartment buildings, surface parking, a club house, gazebo, ponds and trails. Elevations for the buildings have not been completed, but the plans suggest three levels of apartments and underground parking. It is expected that three levels will likely exceed 30 feet. The four buildings are proposed to be built in two phases,with the western two structures being built first, followed by the eastern two structures. The City's Comprehensive Plan talks at length about Orono's rural character and protection of natural resources, noting the delineation of the urban and rural areas is fixed. This project would be the first expansion of the Defined Urban Area since at least 2008. The Planning Commission should determine if MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,October 15,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. the proposed location is appropriate for urban density. If so,the Commission should determine if the proposed plan provides an appropriate level of density, and if so,the higher density would be reflected in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The project as proposed will require an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for both land use and an expansion of the MUSA boundary. For expansions of the MUSA boundary,the Metropolitan Council looks for three units per acre density, which this project would meet. Access to the site will be provided via two new entrances off of Wayzata Boulevard. It is expected that access will line up with the new road serving the Eisinger property to the south. Hennepin County will need to approve all accesses. The proposed parking shows 474 stalls, below the minimum required per ordinance. The applicants propose the number based on the number of bedrooms. Staff does not support the reduction of parking in this area without bus transportation or walkable services/employment. The Planning Commission should discuss the following issues: 1. Does the Planning Commission support expansion of the MUSA boundary into the subject property? 2. Does the Planning Commission support expansion of urban densities into the subject property; and if so,at what density. 3. Does the Planning Commission support higher than 30 feet for buildings. 4. Does the Planning Commission support the modification of the zoning ordinance to facilitate the proposed development? The zoning ordinance states that no property within 250 feet of the OHW of a protected water is to be rezoned to RPUD. Lake Classen is a Protected Water. If the Planning Commission and City Council support the project, some modifications to the zoning ordinance will be necessary to either create a new district or modify an existing district. Barnhart noted he has not reviewed this sketch plan in any detail and that he is looking for direction on the issues outlined in Staff report. Landgraver stated his recollection of the density for this area is that these would be larger lakeshore lots, which is why it was zoned the way it is. Barnhart stated that is consistent with the density in the area with the exception of the park and the school. Landgraver noted on the south side there was a landfill. Landgraver asked if the City is aware of the history of the land and whether the hill is manmade. Barnhart indicated he does not know the history of the property but his understanding is the landfill was confined to the south side of the property. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,October 15,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. Thiesse asked how the new Comprehensive Plan relates to this development. Barnhart stated the City is still governed by the 2030 Comprehensive Plan but that the City will be implementing a new Comprehensive Plan in the very near future. Predominantly the changes to land use and density in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan have occurred along Wayzata Boulevard. Included in those changes are a parcel to the east that has potential for development and the Eisinger Flats project to the south of this site,which introduces higher density into that area. Barnhart stated the Planning Commission could make the case for supporting higher density in this area due to those factors but that they could also make the case that each parcel stands on its own and that higher density may or may not make sense for this property. Barnhart stated the Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee did not recommend any changes in density to this site. Barnhart stated changing the density for this site is a call the Planning Commission and the City Council should make. Thiesse asked how the City's overall density is doing. Barnhart indicated overall the City is doing pretty good. The most recent amendment was the Kelly Avenue apartment building next to the dentist office. The different letters on the chart identify areas of potential growth. Barnhart stated the key number the Metropolitan Council is concerned with is the overall density. When the Metropolitan Council considers a change to the Comprehensive Plan,they look for a minimum density of three units per acre. After the Kelly Avenue Parkway project,the City is at 3.298 units per acre. If the City did not have those projects,the City would be below the three units per acre. Barnhart indicated he has taken those figures and then added the Mogart property, which proposed development of a 10-acre parcel and expanding the MUSA to include that parcel. The City Council agreed with the Planning Commission's recommendation to expand the MUSA for that parcel at 4.5 units an acre. Also added was the Eisinger Flats project of 192 units, which was not included in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. With those two projects included,the City is at 3.82 units per acre. If neither of those projects are done, it would drop the City's overall density to 3.1 units per acre. With those projects included,the City's density buffer is above three units per acre and allows the City to have some flexibility to expand the MUSA boundary. If the Lake Classen project is not done,the City will still remain at 3.82 units. Landgraver asked what the projected growth in the area is. Barnhart indicated the Metropolitan Council does not mandate the City develop but they do mandate that the City provide the opportunity for development. The Metropolitan Council's projected growth in the Orono area is 541 households between now and 2030 and then another 330 households between 2030 and 2040. Barnhart stated the City is not opening up a lot of new growth areas but that they basically react to what people propose. In the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, Staff has attempted to identify areas where growth is likely to happen. It is typical that quite a bit of the development occurs in the rural areas. Eisinger Meadows, Eisinger Flats have been included as new growth areas. If the Eisinger Flats project is not completed,the City would be at 3.4 units per acre but will be short on opportunities for growth. Erickson asked what the area of the site is. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,October 15,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. Barnhart indicated it is approximately 14 acres. Erickson asked if the density on this site would be comparable to what was discussed on Eisinger. Barnhart stated it is. Nick Walton, Contractor, stated he is the president of Reuter Walton and that they have completed a dozen projects together with this architect. Reuter Walton started in 1979 doing single-family custom homes in the metro area and in 2011 started doing multi-family housing. Walton stated they are proposing a project that in their opinion could be a really good use for the site and that they are open to hearing feedback and beginning a dialogue with the City. Scott England, DGR Architect, stated what they are proposing tonight as a concept plan consists of four apartment buildings with two accesses coming off of Wayzata Boulevard. There will be a variety of spaces in between the buildings for the residents' use as well as walking paths and a gazebo. The plan also depicts a clubhouse that is currently within the 150-foot setback, which will likely be moved to the west side of the property. Each of the buildings will have a variety of bedroom types ranging from studio to three-bedroom apartments. England indicated there will be underground and surface parking and that it is not their intent to come up short on parking. In addition,the 150-foot buffer around the lake will not be disturbed and the existing shed on the property will be removed. The buildings will have balconies on all the units and beautiful landscaped areas between and around the buildings. Thiesse asked if they are working with the topography of the land. England indicated he worked off an aerial and that there is a lot going on with the land. England indicated it will be challenging to some degree because there is a mound in the middle. Thiesse asked if the 150-foot setback will take them into the trees. England commented the site is actually quite wooded and there is a path that runs through the whole property as well as two houses and a shed on the site. Everything within the 150 feet setback is dense growth. Libby commented there are some very interesting designs provided in the examples. Libby asked what the projected height of the buildings is. England stated it is their desire to build three stories and ideally each of the stories would be 9 feet,which makes it challenging to keep it at the 30-foot height maximum. Attempts will be made to keep the height of the building down by putting it further into the ground and perhaps having a flat roof. Thiesse asked if they will be going with a foot and a half foot floor thickness. England stated it will probably be about a 16-inch floor depth,which comes to 10.6 for each floor. Landgraver asked if access to Lake Classen will be provided. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,October 15,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. England stated that is something he will have to work with the DNR on and that they would like to incorporate a boardwalk if possible. England stated they want to make sure it is an amenity the residents can use. Nick Walton stated the idea is to build a 3-story building and that they typically would do 9 to 11 feet for the first floor,which ends up being around a 2-foot floor;then 9 foot to ceiling on the second floor, a 2-foot floor; and then 9 feet, with three for the parapet. The shortest way to do a three-story building with 9-foot ceilings is 34 feet. If two feet are added to the first floor, it would be 36 feet, and on a pitched roof, it would end up at 39 feet. Thiesse asked if a two-story building would be viable. Walton indicated they were originally thinking four stories and lowered that to three. Walton stated they typically do not build two-story buildings except for residential. Thiesse stated in his view the 37 to 39 feet will be a struggle to get approved. Walton stated they will look at the height and that they would like to get the Planning Commission's feedback on a flat roof versus a pitched roof Walton stated they are more drawn to a pitched roof Barnhart stated most of the City's PUD developments require a pitched roof. Landgraver stated the residents in the area are used to looking at a natural area and that the height of the building will be a shock. While the site will be developed at some point, 39 feet on top of a hill might be asking too much, and that he would encourage them to be creative on the height. Landgraver noted both the Planning Commission and the City Council have drawn a pretty strong line on height. Lemke asked how many people would live within the 288 units. England indicated it will likely be 600-700 people. Walton noted the project would be phased in. Lemke asked if there is that much demand for rental property in this area. Walton stated in their view there is definitely demand for phase one but that they do not think there is demand for phase two at the present time. Lemke noted last month they looked at a project for 192 units, and then if you add this project in, it comes to around 15 percent of the population of Orono,which seems like a lot of people. Walton stated they have developed 26 different properties over the years and that they have always developed them because the demand was there. Olson asked what the rents will be. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,October 15,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. Walton indicated it will be upper middle rents. The units will not be ultra-high-luxury but it is a beautiful setting and it will be on the water. Some of the bigger units will have higher finishes and higher rents. Walton stated two stories versus three stories will dramatically change the rents. Landgraver asked what kind of amenities will be available on site to the residents, especially since this is an isolated piece of land with a busy road running by. England stated there will be a playground, a clubhouse, a larger community room, and a swimming pool. Each of the buildings themselves will have some common areas, a smaller scaled party room, and an exercise facility. In addition,there will be a lot of space around the site that would be suited towards the different ages. Walton stated the more units they build,the more amenities they would be able to offer. Erickson asked how this relates to the County 112 turnback project and whether there will be new trails in the area. Barnhart stated to his understanding there have been some discussions about a potential trail but nothing has been finalized at this time. The access to the site and any trails will have to be coordinated with Hennepin County. Erickson stated years ago there was discussion about a trail that would connect to County Road 6 and he is not sure how far that discussion went. Libby stated on the last project the Planning Commission looked at,the architect proposed a certain price range, and that he was wondering whether they could do that here. Walton indicated two bedrooms are often 800 to 1,200 square feet and would range from $1,600 to $2,800. One bedroom typically ranges from 600 to 700 square foot range and are anywhere from$1,200 to $1,700 depending on the size. Walton stated those are the typical ranges and that they use $2 per square foot. Libby commented the demand is there for rental properties and that the City has to serve all the demands for housing types. Thiesse stated his biggest concern is that the 2040 Comprehensive Plan reflects this as lower density and was not proposed to be changed. Thiesse stated in his view this project looks huge and will be a major change, especially since anyone currently looking across Lake Classen sees nothing but green. Thiesse noted the City has had some discussions in the past about the view shed, and to him this seems large, especially at three stories. If the building has a pitched roof, it will be sticking way out of the ground. Libby stated for a sketch plan,this is fairly well detailed. Libby asked if it is feasible to bring the building down more into the ground without running into a problem with the water table. England indicated he was projecting that the lower level of the far right and left buildings would be at 986,which would be several feet above the water level. The buildings would be centered more on the mound in the middle of the site. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,October 15,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. Walton stated they will look at two stories and they will come back with more data about the height of the trees. Walton commented he likes the idea of doing a cut in the ground to reduce the height but that they also have to worry about the trees and their roots. Thiesse stated based on the hardcover, it does not appear there will be a lot of trees saved. Ressler stated he is assuming that most of the area will be cleared to the lake. Walton stated they were not proposing to do anything with the 150-foot setback and that currently the 150-foot setback is dense. Everything in the middle would basically be cut but that they are not planning on cutting the perimeter. Ressler asked what the current residents will be looking at from the lake. Walton indicated they will need to study that and that they can perhaps take some drone aerial shots. England noted the growth is very dense and that there will not be a very clear view of the lake from the building but that they can do a site section cutting across the lake. Landgraver commented one thing that is helpful from a visual standpoint is do provide some elevations and to delineate the 150-foot setback. Thiesse asked if boats are allowed on the lake. Barnhart stated to his knowledge it is nonmotorized. Lemke stated in his view the applicants should adhere to the 30-foot height, and that his first reaction when he saw the sketch plan was that, holy crap, it's a lot of apartments. Lemke stated in his view it is a lot for the property. Thiesse stated the first time he looked at it, he also had that same reaction. Thiesse noted the property is still guided to be lower density and that it does not appear the City is looking for more density at this time. Walton asked if that is because they are considering 192 units across the street or because the Comprehensive Plan was not changed. Thiesse indicated it is both. Landgraver commented the site is isolated and is next to some of the other high-density development that is occurring in the City, so maybe it is the best use of this parcel. Thiesse commented the buildings do not need to be this high. Chair Thiesse asked if anyone from the public would like to comment on this proposal. Stacey Royal, 3135 Jamestown Road, commented after sitting through this presentation, she feels like she is in the twilight that something like this would be proposed for this location. Orono's logo has wildlife MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,October 15,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. in it and it is a lakeshore city. Classen Lake has pelicans and is the home to swans that have lived there for a number of years. Bill Lurton donated the parcel of land where the dog park is right now. When he was told about this proposed building, he was crushed that this is what could be done with the land next to the park. There are six other neighbors at the meeting tonight and they want to make sure that their feelings about this particular development are understood. Royal thanked Jeremy Barnhart for sharing the numbers for density and the Metropolitan Council's numbers for projected growth. Orono does not need this development to meet those numbers since Orono is over 3.0, and if those numbers are driving this development,the rules and regulations would need to be changed, including height, rezoning, and density. The site is also not in the MUSA, which is what goes toward those Metropolitan Council numbers. Royal stated her thoughts were very similar to Commissioner Lemke's in that, holy crap,this is a lot of buildings to be added. Thomas Sawyer, 3405 County Road 6, stated some interesting points have been raised and that they have talked a little bit about density and comparing density in other areas. Sawyer stated he has lived on Lake Classen for 22 years and that this lot is unique. None of the other sites are on a natural lake or on a wetland or on a peninsula. The applicant is attempting to squeeze this intense development between a dog park,which was donated to the City for the community; between Orono schools,which is for the community; and Baker Park,which is also for the community. This is a proposal that does not do the community good but is for profit. The only justification for the project is to expand housing,which can be done elsewhere and does not need to be done on a natural lake in Orono. Sawyer stated the development is incompatible with the other existing housing in the area and that there are only six single homes on the lake. Sawyer stated he is concerned about the hard surface coverage and drainage. The water levels of Lake Classen currently are high and that he deals with flooding in the spring. Sawyer stated in his opinion the density is too extensive, and that if they want to develop housing or apartments,this is not the place to do it and that there are other places where it would be more compatible. Sawyer stated he really believes that as residents the local government is here to represent them. Everyone has the duty to protect natural lakes and wetlands, and that putting this development in this location is not doing that. It is important that the residents and government are accountable to that. Sawyer commented this is not the best use for the land and in his view the community would not support this. There is no justification for changing the zoning or the Comprehensive Plan for this development. The area should be developed as it was laid out in the Comprehensive Plan under the current zoning and that he would encourage the Planning Commission to stop this foolishness. Jennifer Decabelus, 3155 Jamestown Road, stated she shares the same concerns as have already been expressed and that she has lived at her property for ten years and moved here because of the serenity and privacy of the area. The Planning Commission's comments were appreciated about the size and height of the building. Decabelus commented this area is meant to be a natural area, and if this development is approved,when the children go down to the nature center by the school,they will see this building and they will not see the environment that they have grown to appreciate. Within a one-mile radius of the school,there are five other significant developments going on,which will add to the congestion,the traffic, and create a lack of safety for the children walking to and from school. Decabelus stated she cannot imagine adding 500 more MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,October 15,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. people to this one-mile radius without it having a very negative impact to the area they call home. Decabelus stated she appreciates the Planning Commission's serious consideration of this project. Andy Petich,Jamestown Road, stated when he first saw this proposal, he also said, holy crap,this really can't be happening. When he moved to Orono,the big selling point was that it was two-acre zoning, and that he never dreamed there would be a 288-unit building right in his line of sight. This project is a major outlier for our community. Petich commented he is sure the applicants do great work, but that this is not the right location for this project. Lake Classen is a natural lake and people cannot boat or swim in it. It is a marsh and no one is going to want to go down to the end of a dock to a marsh because they can't really use the water. There are eagles flying around, swans, and tons of wildlife and there should not be something that looks like it belongs in St. Louis Park there. Petich stated he would be very disappointed if this is given very much further consideration. Laurel McGloughlin, 3565 County Road 6, questioned what this will do to the enrollment of the schools and whether there are plans to increase the size of the schools. With all the high-density housing going in already, Orono Schools are not going to fit all these kids very easily. Heidi Cole,Jamestown Road, stated they chose the house they did because it was a two-acre lot minimum,which is great,and that it is nice to come home from a stressful job and look at the ducks,the swans,the osprey,the beavers and the eagles. The area is very quiet. Cole stated when she got this letter in the mail, it was like, oh,my God,what is that. I'm going to look at this big apartment building. This project does not belong there. Cole stated this is not what they bought into, and that at the time they purchased the property,the realtor told them that they were paying for a million-dollar view. Looking at huge apartment buildings is not a million-dollar view. If the area is zoned for that, it is different than what their expectations are and that it will destroy the whole character of the area. Neil Riley, 3175 Jamestown Road, stated he just learned about this and that he has to image that there are other considerations, including precedent setting, as it relates to the community and allowing for rezoning on a wetland. Riley stated he would ask the Planning Commission give consideration to the precedent setting this will have on a small community whose motto is the lakeshore city. In addition,this will be a visible project from Baker Park. Riley stated in his view this will truly be changing something that decades from now will create more precedent for other similar buildings. Riley commented he would love to invest in this since he can imagine it will be a tremendous investment, but ultimately it is a business that is going to deliver 95 percent of its rental income back to its investors and not to the community. Riley stated while there might be some economic benefit to ultimately developing it, he would ask that the City not rezone it to something that the community is going to regret. Orono is a tiny community and its motto is protecting its lakeshore. Orono also bought Big Island Park to help conserve that and that they should think about putting this elsewhere. Bill Lurton, Stonebay, stated he lived for 25 years on the bluff on the east side of Lake Classen. He and his wife also owned the property across the lake consisting of approximately 40 acres. When the new highway came through,they decided that they did not want to see a lot of development on the lake and so they gifted their property to Orono for a park. Lurton stated he never envisioned hundreds of more people on the lake because they knew it was zoned for two or three homes. The only boat he ever saw on the lake in 25 years was a little boat that the Orono School used to teach biology. Lake Classen is a protected lake and is home to trumpeter swans and eagles. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,October 15,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. Lurton stated as he thought about this, it just did not make sense to have it. Lurton stated it is not a lake for boating and that it is not a safe lake to go out on in the winter. Lurton indicated he is opposed to such a proposal for this lake. There were no further public comments. Thiesse asked whether the Planning Commission supports expansion of the MUSA boundary to the subject property. Lemke commented since it is going to be on the other side of the road, it makes sense to extend it, but that he is not sure it will be allowed if it is not high density. Barnhart stated that is a good point. The Planning Commission can support expansion of the MUSA and not support the density. The same questions could come up if this project is not approved and there is a different proposal for more or less density. The answers would help provide direction and advice to people coming forward. Lemke asked what would be the density to put this all into motion. Thiesse noted the City just looked at a proposal last month where they were trying to protect the trees and that the MUSA would help protect the trees and the lake. The City could extend the MUSA even for low density due to extenuating circumstances. Landgraver commented the City has been fortunate there have not been a lot of septic failures along the lake and that he would be in favor of expanding it. Olson indicated he is in agreement with that Erickson stated he would favor of the expansion of the MUSA since whatever development happens would need to be sewered. Erickson stated he agrees with much of what has been said so far and that the greatest issue is the height and how it relates to the existing trees. Erickson stated he recalls when the Peterson project was first built in Wayzata in the 1970s, it was four stories high and it was a shock because it was the first development that was higher than the tree line. It also certainly wasn't the last. There are a lot of people in Wayzata who now regret how high some of those buildings have become and Orono has an opportunity to not repeat their mistake. Erickson commented there is such a wealth of existing trees and that they should keep it as low as they can relative to those trees. Libby stated he would just like to make the statement to the residents who came here tonight that because the MUSA line could be extended into that property,that does not predicate that it would automatically change the density. While the Planning Commission may support expansion of the MUSA,that does not mean they also support the density. The residents that came here tonight should be complimented. Libby stated he would also like to invite the public in general to attend the October 25 advisory committee open house to talk about the Comprehensive Plan and that he would encourage everyone to go to that open house. Ressler stated what he thinks about when considering a project is how he would feel about that project being next to him. The site is not currently zoned for this. The next question is, if you could not see any MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,October 15,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. structure whatsoever on the site,would you still be opposed to it. The answer is probably yes because people are naturally opposed to change. Ressler noted the site is on a busy street but has easy access. There have also been some arguments made for not disrupting the traffic flows. Ressler stated he understands the comment about the schools and that has been a point of discussion in previous meetings. Ressler stated he could see where this is one of the better sites for more density but the question is whether it can be something that can be done that is not disruptive to the views of the people who live there. Ressler noted a lot of decisions the Planning Commission makes are to appease the Metropolitan Council in order to be compliant with their expectations. James Riley asked whether the City has to do everything the Metropolitan Council says since the Metropolitan Council is an unelected group of people. A lot of the residents moved out here to live in rural Orono. That was the selling point. Another selling point was the small class sizes in the school. Riley stated when he moved here,there were 22 kids in the class but now there is 36. Class sizes are getting bigger. Riley stated never in a million years would he have dreamed there would be almost a 300-unit apartment building going in on this site. Riley stated the question is whether the City is doing what the Metropolitan Council say or whether they are governing themselves here. Barnhart stated the Metropolitan Council does not tell Orono how to develop but they do tell the City that they have to develop a plan to provide opportunity to achieve the growth projections that they prescribe. The City does not have to approve any of those projects. Barnhart stated previously the City was not providing enough opportunity to achieve the desired growth. While the City does not necessarily need this project to achieve the desired density,the City has to approve a Comprehensive Plan every ten years. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission to support the expansion of the MUSA to this site. Landgraver asked how many residential homes could be built on this site. Barnhart indicated six to seven. Lemke pointed out they could build seven McMansions and the visual impact would be almost as much as this. Lemke noted in that case there would not need to be any difference in zoning or variances since it would be allowed on site. Landgraver stated unfortunately it is developable land and it will not stay undeveloped and the residents will lose their pristine view. The question is, without any changes or input,what could be put there. Presumably those homes would be pushed up to the 150-foot setback so they could have as much lake view as possible,and regardless of where this project goes, it will be developed up to six or seven homes. Landgraver stated he knows Mr. Lurton donated 40 acres as a buffer,but there will be something there at some point and it will be visually jarring to go from eagles and swans and trees to McMansions. Barnhart stated urban density is anything with one acre or more in lot size. In a perfect world the City could say they support urban density at three units per acre if they were looking to change. Realistically it would be better to say they support rural or urban density rather than prescribe a certain number. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,October 15,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. Landgraver stated he does not feel the Planning Commission should put a number on it,and the interesting point that was brought up here from the neighbors was put the density elsewhere. The idea of going to the Comprehensive Plan meeting and talking about it would be very helpful. Thiesse indicated he is not in favor of increasing the density on this site given the view shed from County Road 6 and Jamestown and because it is a pristine area. Thiesse indicated he would rather see six or seven houses. Thiesse stated what is being proposed is way too much. Erickson stated he has seen townhouse projects at seven to ten units per acre that are heavily wooded, and that he would not want the Planning Commission to set an exact number tonight. As the discussion goes forward, however,they should think about a tree inventory or visual representations of how the building or buildings would look relative to saving as many trees as possible, especially around the periphery of the site. Lemke noted higher density does not necessarily mean an ugly project and that someone could put up seven really ugly homes. Lemke stated he would like to see a little higher density but that it should be thoughtfully done,with consideration of the views across the lake, and that in his view this is too much. Olson stated he echoes that comment a little bit. Olson stated the one thing he has noticed is that developers should want to have the support of the neighbors and the community on any project they do, which will be a difficult piece in this situation. Given the proposed height and density, in his view it would not be successful and that he would encourage the developer to take the residents' comments to heart. Libby commented the developer needs to be very conscious and sensitive to the environmental impacts and that the loss of legacy trees will impact everyone. Libby encourage the developer to be sensitive to the neighbors' comments. Ressler stated it is pretty clear the proposed height and density is bad. Since the site is zoned for development,there will probably be something there at some point. It could either be seven ugly homes with 30-foot roof heights or it could be something else. Ressler stated the visibility of whatever is there will play a strong role in how it is considered. Thiesse stated the last issue for consideration is whether the Planning Commission supports the modification of the zoning ordinance, and from the comments so far, it sounds like the Planning Commission is,to some degree, in favor of modification to support some type of development. Landgraver asked what the next step in the process is. Barnhart stated the next step is the City Council will receive the comments of the Planning Commission and then review it on November 13, which is a Tuesday. If the developer wants to proceed forward, he would submit a preliminary plat,which will take some time to put together. Barnhart indicated concurrently Staff could incorporate this project into the 2040 Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Landgraver noted the Comprehensive Plan meeting is an opportunity for the public to have input into the density. The Planning Commission took no formal action on this item. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,October 15,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. 4. LA18-000057 CITY OF ORONO,TEXT AMENDMENT—ACCESSORY BUILDING AND STRUCTURE SETBACKS,8:20 P.M.—8:44 P.M. Curtis noted this is a continuation of the discussion beginning in June regarding proposed changes for Accessory Building and Structure setbacks. The changes discussed thus far have been regarding the overall organization of the regulations in the Code and whether or not adjustments to the existing setbacks are needed. Staff has prepared a draft ordinance based on past feedback. The code has been reorganized so that a user can find the majority of the information regarding principal building, accessory buildings, and accessory structure setbacks within the specific zoning district sections. In addition,modifications were made in the Accessory Buildings and Structures and Non-encroachment sections. The Planning Commission should provide direction on the following: 1. Accessory Buildings and Oversized Accessory Buildings streetward of the Principal; exterior finish standards. 2. Increase the maximum size for an Oversized Accessory Building and increase the total accessory building footprint totals for lots over nine acres. 3. Flexible side setbacks based on non-conforming lot width were added to all R Districts except for RR-1A(5-acre district). 4. On lakeshore lots,the lake yard takes the place of the front yard. The table is meant to address both lake and non-lakeshore lots so it includes a column for front/street setbacks and a column for rear/street. The Planning Commission should reopen the public hearing and receive public comments. The Commission should discuss the above topics and provide direction to Staff. The Planning Commission may choose to move this amendment forward to the City Council or table the application if further discussion or changes are warranted. Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 8:25 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this item. Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 8:25 p.m. Thiesse asked what the Planning Commission feels about Item No. 1. Curtis noted it is the last provision in Section 23 and has been included for discussion. Olson asked if the 120 square foot piece is current. Curtis stated Staff is proposing to keep that. The underlined language is new or retained language and the stricken language would be removed. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,October 15,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. Olson asked whether someone could proceed forward with a variance if they wanted to deviate from the exterior finish standards. Curtis indicated they would need a variance and that in Staff's view some argument could be made with the words consistent in design and color. As it relates to Section B, if an accessory building is streetward, Staff is looking for the color and design to be the same,but the property owner could ask for a variance if they did not want to use that material. Libby commented he likes this language but that it should be noted it will also increase the cost to the homeowner. Libby stated the Planning Commission may need to be prepared to see an increase in variances. Curtis noted economic difficulty is not a practical difficulty. Libby stated as soon as you get into custom features and materials, it could be tens of thousands of dollars in additional costs. Libby stated the City needs to be conscious that there will be a difference. Thiesse noted currently it is not allowed and this would allow it under certain rules. Olson asked what the definition of consistent is. Curtis stated the current definition says consistent design and color, and that if the principal structure has a pitched roof and is red, Staff would expect the accessory structure to have a pitched roof and red. Olson stated at some point it may be necessary to define the word consistent. Curtis stated that has not been an issue in the past and that the language relating to materials makes it easier. Lemke stated he has an issue with dictating design like that and that in his view the City is trying to say they want everything to look exactly alike, which is scary and may be difficult to do. Landgraver stated he agrees to some extent but that they are asking for whatever is being built is harmonious what other things on the property. Landgraver stated he is supportive of it. Lemke commented he likes the word harmonious rather than consistent. Erickson asked how often they see a Class B house where they contemplate a Class A accessory structure. Curtis stated in the situations where the City has granted variances to this setback,they have asked the property owners for architectural accessories. The requirement is not out of the realm of what the City is looking for, and the whole point of the architectural requirement is to help mitigate the closeness of the accessory building to the road rather than the home. Curtis stated she is attempting to mitigate the negative impact of that and would be open to different ways of doing that. Curtis requested the Planning Commission provide some direction on whether they feel those two districts are acceptable or whether any district would be acceptable. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,October 15,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. Libby stated in his view there almost has to have universal application of the rules unless someone has a lot where the accessory structure is not visible at all. Olson noted in a two-acre district,there might not be much visibility. Curtis asked if these rules would make sense in the half-acre and one-acre zones. Libby commented that would make sense. If different zones are being treated differently, there should be different rules and that he is not sure it is needed in the rural districts. Curtis noted rural districts are typically where an accessory building is constructed, and that she is not sure it should be universally applied. Barnhart stated Staff feels it would be more appropriately applied to the rural districts than the half-acre district,which is why there is a distinction between the two zoning districts. Landgraver stated if it was applied to the denser districts, it could create a whole host of problems and would not apply to where the demand is either. Landgraver stated in his view this is a good start, and if Staff finds there are people in other areas that want to put a shed streetward of the house,they can look at it again. The was the consensus of the Planning Commission that the language in Section 23 is acceptable. Curtis stated the second item relates to increasing the maximum size for an oversized accessory building and increasing the total accessory building footprint totals for lots over nine acres. This refers to Section 78-1430 in the current code. The existing table ends at nine acres and caps at 3,000 single footprint building. Curtis indicated she took the same formula used in the other size breakdowns and expanded the table. Staff is recommending for lots 13 acres to 14 acres, as well as 14 acres or more, be allowed a total of 8,000 square footprint instead of 7,000. The change would allow larger properties to have a larger building and then the total of accessory structures would be increased as well. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that the language relating to maximum size and total accessory building footprint totals is acceptable. Curtis stated she would like input from the Planning Commission on the tables regarding flexible side setbacks. Allow exception to apply to increase flexibility for narrow lots. The change would not apply to lots over five acres. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that Item 3 is acceptable. Curtis stated the last item relates to rear/street and front/street setbacks for both lake and non-lakeshore lots. Staff has added rear/street to the table from a setback standpoint. The City does have a side street and a rear street already. Thiesse stated street side is also the rear side on a lakeshore property and that they could leave it as street side. Curtis indicated the City also has a street side. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,October 15,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. Olson stated in his view it is easily explainable and that he is not sure how they could better explain it. Curtis stated she does not want to add confusion to it. Barnhart stated the goal is to minimize the need for people to call the City for clarification. Curtis noted she also simplified some of the non-encroachment language. In the existing code there are a couple of paragraphs that have three or four provisions in that paragraph and those were pulled out and set out on their own. Lemke moved,Landgraver seconded,to recommend approval of Application No. 18-000057,Text Amendment: Accessory Building and Structure Setbacks. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0. 5. LA18-000084 CITY OF ORONO,TEXT AMENDMENT—GRADING AND LAND ALTERATION,8:44 P.M.—8:53 P.M. Oakden stated this text amendment pertains to land alterations which include grading, filling, and topographic alterations in all districts. Currently there is some confusion with the existing language by applicants. In addition, Staff will often discover a conditional use permit is required during the building permit review,which delays the application. Simplifying the existing code will clarify the process pertaining to land alteration permits and help streamline the permitting process. The City closely regulates grading and land alteration activities for several reasons, including the following: 1. To manage stormwater discharge, ensuring drainage does not negatively impact neighboring properties. 2. Manage hauling traffic and noise. 3. Preventing erosion issues into adjacent properties, wetlands, lakes, and roads. Within these goals, Staff proposes regulations that address the following situations: a. Mining b. Land alteration not associated with a building permit c. Land alteration of more than 50 cubic yards in the lake yard with or without a building permit d. Land alteration of more than 500 cubic yards within the Shoreland Overlay District, excluding activity directly related to building permits e. Grading and land alteration that serve to artificially raise the principal structure over X feet from existing grade; i.e., engineered grade f. Soil export not associated with a building permit g. Reduce or eliminate regulations that do not serve stated goals. The Planning Commission should discuss the scope of land alteration permits and provide direction to Staff to create proposed language. Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 8:48 p.m. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,October 15,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Chair Thiesse continued the public hearing to the November 19 Planning Commission meeting. Ressler stated if the rules are being made to be similar to the surrounding cities,that would help simplify things. Thiesse asked what they are looking at as it relates to artificially raising the grade. Oakden stated the intent of the artificial grade was to prevent people from mounding up a pile of dirt, artificially raising the grade, and then building a house on top of that. Staff has found that a large amount of grading is needed for some of these large homes,which is triggering the need for variances. Staff is wondering whether that is reasonable and whether it should be done by adding clearer regulations and then approve it through the building permit process. Barnhart indicated Staff will do some more research on that and come up with some proposed language. Thiesse stated managing stormwater discharge,hauling traffic,and preventing erosion is important and should remain regulated. Thiesse asked if anyone has any comments on the bullet points. Landgraver suggested Staff look at how the current regulations support each of those goals and then compare them to the surrounding cities. Oakden stated she will do further research on Wayzata and Chanhassen and bring it back to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission took no official action on this item. 6. LA18-000044 CITY OF ORONO,2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT,8:53 P.M.—9:05 P.M. Barnhart noted on November 19 the Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and provide a recommendation to the City Council as to any suggested changes. On October 25 the Advisory Committee will host an open house to allow the public to view the plans and ask any questions of committee members. Afterwards,the Advisory Committee will review all comments received and provide direction to Staff. On December 10 the City Council is expected to review and act on the plan for submission to the Metropolitan Council by the December 13, 2018, deadline. Barnhart noted he has not made any changes to the plan since it was proposed in April. To meet the growth projections of the Metropolitan Council,the Land Use Map was updated. The map reflects a revised listing of land use categories. These ten categories are used throughout the document per State and Metropolitan Council requirements and include seven residential,two commercial/industrial, and a park/open space land use. Island residential is a new land use and is employed for the residences on Big Island and Deering Island. In the northern portion of the community,residential land uses were introduced to the Kelley Parkway and Wayzata Boulevard areas. 1 V MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,October 15,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. In order to prevent expansion of the MUSA, and therefore introduction of density in rural areas, increased opportunity for density had to be added in the Navarre and northern Orono areas. The Advisory Committee applied density in areas where they felt it was most appropriate given transportation networks, neighboring land uses, and services available. The majority of this density was added to the Wayzata Boulevard area. Density increased in Navarre primarily associated with development/redevelopment of the commercial areas. The Plan shows an Urban Medium Density of 3-10 units per acre in the area primarily west of Crystal Bay and Carman's Bay. This land use density was shown to reflect actual development densities and the LR-1C zoning district,with the goal of having the zoning ordinance match the land use plan. The City's utility plans were updated to reflect new regulations and rules established since the 2008 plan. The Comprehensive Plan does not propose the expansion of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area boundary. Expansion of the MUSA comes with a requirement that parcels located within the expanded area be developed at three units per acre or greater. The City Council recently supported an expansion of the MUSA to include the western 10 acres at 1003 Wildhurst Trail. As it relates to planned development sites,the Committee updated the map, originally developed as part of the 2008 Comprehensive Plan. Revised map shows five areas that could be the subject to development proposals. Those five areas provide growth in a range of densities, from two-acre lots to high density residential. The Navarre Area Plan was incorporated in the Land use Chapter. Finally, the Advisory Committee worked hard to reduce the length of the document by removing redundant statements in the hopes of making it more readable while retaining the major policy discussions outlined within. Barnhart requested the Planning Commission review the plan and then provide any comments they might have before the October 25 meeting. Landgraver asked if there is anything more they can do to obtain public comment. Barnhart recommended they talk to their neighbors and friends and encourage them to look at the plan and come to the open house. Barnhart commented it can be a difficult plan to understand and that they hope to explain it at the open house. UPDATE ON OCTOBER 8,2018,CITY COUNCIL MEETING Barnhart reported the Orono City Council approved the following items at their October 8 meeting: • The land alteration permit for 2655 Orono Drive was approved. • The Dunkley application for 2709 Walters Port Lane was approved. • The variance for 1335 Arbor Street was approved with advice to keep construction traffic off the street. • For 1725 Bohns Point,the Council did support a hardcover variance but did not support expansion of the boathouse upwards. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,October 15,2018 6:30 o'clock p.m. The City Council also reviewed three sketch plans at the meeting. On the Morgart sketch plan,the Council indicated they were receptive to expanding the MUSA. As it relates to the Baldur Park sketch plan,the Council directed Staff to plan for the maximum number of lots and directed the applicant follow the code as much as possible. For the Lakewest development,the City Council was okay with the proposed density but did not support any height above 30 feet. Thiesse asked if 30 feet is still a reasonable number for height given the desire for 9-foot ceilings and a 2- foot trusses. Barnhart stated the Council has been pretty consistent on the 30 feet. Landgraver stated for high-density housing that number perhaps should be reconsidered. Erickson stated it would be interesting to research the 30-foot height limit and the date it was first enacted. Back in the 1970s and into the early 1980s, an 8-foot ceiling was very standard but nowadays an 8-foot ceiling is obsolete. Most builders are now talking about 9-foot ceiling, and if you have two or three stories, that adds a few feet to the total. Erickson stated just to conform with societal changes, a modest bump from 30 to 32 might be reasonable. Libby commented a work session would be the perfect forum to discuss something like that. OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION None ADJOURNMENT Olson moved,Landgraver seconded,to adjourn the Orono City Council meeting at 9:14 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0. John Thiesse, Chair