The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About01-20-1998 Planning Commission Minutes ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JANUARY 20, 1998 • ROLL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Chair Dale Lindquist, Charles Schroeder(arrived during discussion of item#5, Sandra Smith, Elizabeth Hawn, William Stoddard (who left the meeting shortly after arrival), and Liii Iviciviiiian. Janice Berg was absent. Council Member Goetten was also present. The following represented the City Staff: Senior Planning Coordinator Michael Gaffron, Public Services Director Greg Gappa, City Planner Elizabeth Van Zomeren, Planning Intern Brad Bressler, and Recorder Sherry Frost. Chair Lindquist called the meeting to order at 6:33 p.nm. PUBLIC HEARINGS OLD BUSINESS Conditional Use Permits (#1) #2289 JON PENDLETON, 350 NORTH ARM LANE - Conditional use permit to seasonally allow a horse in the LR-1A Zoning District- 6:33-6:44 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. • The Applicant was present. Bressler reported that the application is for a conditional use permit to keep one horse on the property during the summer months, April through November. There are two pasture areas proposed. Pasture#1 is 1.14 acres and pasture#2 is .67 acres for a total of 1.81 acres. A previous proposal under consideration included a barn and the housing of two horses. Bressler reviewed the findings, namely the requirement for the CUP, compliance with applicable provisions in the zoning code related to feedlots, and fencing. Pasture#1 is not considered a feedlot due to its size and would not need to meet a 300' setback from protected waterways as required for pasture#2, which meets the 300' setback. A minimum of two acres of pasture is required for keeping one horse. The intention for the minimum size requirement is to provide adequate area for each animal if the pasture is used as a food source. The horse would be fed and would not be dependent on grazing in the pasture. Staff recommends approval with pasture#1 being the primary site and the use of pasture #2 to occasionally relieve pressure on the vegetation of pasture#1. The recommendation is based on findings of the extension educator from the University of Minnesota, Mr. Geske. • Pendleton had no additional comments at this time. Z MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 • (#1 - #2289 Jon Pendleton- Continued) There were no public comments. Smith confirmed that the horse would be housed elsewhere over the winter months. Lindquist asked the applicant if he was satisfied with the staff recommendations. Pendleton asked if pasture#2 would require fencing if only used as a secondary alternative. Lindquist said it could be fenced if it is needed for use. Bressler indicated the use of pasture#2 primarily to provide relief for vegetation growth in pasture#1. Pendleton said he would wait and see if pasture#2 would be used. Hawn noted the letter referencing best management practices is not specific as to handling of manure. Pendleton said he will speak with Mr. Geske regarding this issue and will comply with requirements. Smith said Pendleton would most likely be required to compost the manure. Lindquist asked that clarification on this issue be resolved by time of Council review on February 9. Hawn asked that the compost pile be located away from any wetlands. Pendleton agreed noting the terrain is higher in the pasture area. Lindquist moved, McMillan seconded, to approve Application#2289 per staff recommendation with letter from Mr. Geske referencing proper program procedures. • Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#2) #2290 STEVEN AND ELAINE SILUS, 3225 CASCO CIRCLE - Conditional use permit to grade within 5' of the south property line to allow a driveway and retaining wall- 6:44-7:02 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicants were present. Van Zomeren distributed pictures of the construction site from last summer and current pictures with the garage removed. She showed the plans and survey of the property with elevations highlighted and including the landscaping plan. The driveway plan was reviewed. The driveway is located T from the property line with a retaining wall and curb to prevent runoff Runoff will be directed into the south side yard. The driveway had previously been blacktopped and was shared with the neighboring property. A drainage swale with steel edging and rock mulch is proposed in the side yard. No fabric underlayment is proposed because it would increase hardcover. Hawn asked about the height of the retaining wall. Silus said the wall would be at a 3-1/2' maximum height by the house and be lower closer to the street. The curb is 8" in height. 411 2 y MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 • -(#2 - #2290 Steven and Elaine Silus Continued) The space for backing out of the driveway is proposed at 24', where 21' would be allowed without the conditional use permit. Typically, 30' is recommended for a side-loading garage. Van Zomeren clarified that the application is not for a variance but for a conditional use permit, which has different standards. The use is authorized in the zoning code with performance standards. Grading within 5' of a lot line is allowed as a CUP. The Planning Commissioners are to decide whether this grading should be allowed. Van Zomeren reviewed the analysis presented in the packet. It was noted that the neighbors object to the retaining wall and driveway being located 2' from their property line. Van Zomeren noted the need for proper turning radius. Variances were granted in March, 1997, for the property. The structure meets the 10' side setback. Typically, normal grading for a new home and driveway does not require a CUP. The building inspector determined that grading within 5' of the property line is not normal or customary. One concern is whether the grading will impact the amount of drainage on adjacent property. Van Zomeren reviewed Staffs recommendation asking for consideration of issues as laid 411 out in the packet. If the Planning Commissioners vote in the negative, findings are required. Van Zomeren said the neighbors, the Spilseth's are out of town and ask that consideration be given to their comments made in their letter, which was included in the packet. Silus had no additional comments at this time. Joan Fitzpatrick, a friend of the Spilseth's, said the Spilseth's were against the driveway being 2'from the property line. She indicated exhaust fumes would gather from this location. The Spilseths object to losing the combined driveway, increasing the elevation, and potentially increasing runoff. Jay Richards, 3243 Casco Circle, asked why the application was not considered a variance request. Van Zomeren said the application has always been for a CUP and no hardship substantiation is then required. McMillan asked if a driveway can be located at the property lot line. Van Zomeren replied that this could occur, but in this case, the grade was being changed and was not considered normal or customary. She indicated the problem was created by the surveyor's use of topographical maps, which can var 2', which on a narrow lot such as the subject • property can be unreliable. Van Zomeren noted that conditions can be placed on the CUP. If the conditions cannot be met, the CUP can be denied. 3 4 � MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 (#2 - #2290 Steven and Elaine Silus Continued) Smith asked if the inspector had any alternatives such as lowering the height of the wall. Bruce Vang, Building Inspector, said he did not have any alternatives given location of the garage doors. Smith asked if the garage doors faced the street front, whether it would have any effect on runoff and if there would be a need for the retaining walls. Vang said front loading doors were suggested at the beginning of construction when it was determined that grading was required. The applicant had told him that he would be unable to have three stalls if that change were made. Smith asked if front loading doors would allow for lower retaining walls. Vang said the retaining walls would not be needed along the south property line. He said that a wall would be needed along the north property line to allow the driveway to be lower. McMillan questioned whether the City Engineer had reviewed the drainage plan. Van Zomeren said City Engineer Kellogg reviewed the drainage. It was determined that the drainage would run into the side yard. Lindquist was informed by the applicant that he understood the problem with the plan as it exists. Silus said the elevation of the garage dropped during construction and would be lower yet if the footings were moved. • Hawn said she could not support the plan as there were design options available to the applicant at the time the construction began that would have eliminated the problems. She noted the situation was not created by the neighborhood, the plan was opposed by the neighbors, and would have an adverse effect on the neighbors as well. Smith, Lindquist, and McMillan agreed. Hawn moved, Smith seconded, to deny Application#2290 for a conditional use permit to change the grade within 5' of the property line. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. The application will be reviewed by the Council on January 26, 1998. NEW BUSINESS Preliminary Plats (#3) #2316 MIKE HILBELINK, HAVING AN INTEREST IN 120 GOLDEN VIEW DRIVE - Preliminary plat for a 3-lot Class III Subdivision - 7:02-7:04 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. • The Applicant was present. 4 Fr MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 Mike Hilbelink - Continued) - #2316 M ) Bressler reported that the application is a proposal for a 3-lot subdivision of a 7.97 acre parcel. Two new 2 acre lots and a 3.97 acre building lot for the existing residence would be created. All lots meet the lot width and area requirements and future building sites will conform to code. Access will be from Golden View Drive. The application was reviewed by the septic inspector and approved. There was rearrangement of one lot line due to an alternate septic site location. Bressler said there are no drainage issues. The park dedication has not been determined. Staff recommended approval. Hilbelink had no additional comments. There were no public comments. Smith moved, McMillan seconded, to approve Application#2316. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. The application will be reviewed at the January 26, 1998 Council meeting. Lot Line Rearrangement with Variances (Item#4 discussed after Item#5 due to absence of applicants.) • Variance Renewals (#5) #2330 ROBERT BEUTLER, 1331 NORTH ARM DRIVE - Renewal for lot width to construct a new residence- 7:04-7:22 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was present. Bressler reported the proposal is for renewal of a lot width variance for construction of a new residence. Pictures were distributed. The existing principal structure would be retained as an accessory structure with plumbing and heating facilities removed upon completion of the new residence. The existing shed does not meet the side setback. The combined footprint of all accessory structures is 1,960 s.f. In this district, 2,000 s.f is the maximum combined footprint allowed for accessory structures. The City Attorney has drafted a restrictive covenant prohibiting the use of the accessory structure as a rental dwelling unit. 1110 5 xr MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 111 - #2330 Robert Beutler - Continued) #233 b ) Bressler said Staff recommends approval of the renewal variance of 65.11'to allow the construction of a new residence on a lot of record. Conditions include removal of the plumbing and heating facilities from the current principal structure prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy and execution of the restrictive covenant. Mrs. Wendy Beutler said the time period for the new construction had expired. She did not believe removal of the heating facilities was previously stipulated. She would also like to maintain running water for gardening purposes. Mrs. Beutler said the Planning Commission had previously recommended maintaining the heating and plumbing facilities, but the Council required removal. She thought this pertained to the plumbing only. Mr. Beutler said the Council requested the restrictive covenant due to concern that the structure would be used for rental purposes. He would like to have the structure heated. Beutler indicated the structure is in good condition and meets all code requirements. Hawn said the Planning Commission had previously recommended maintaining the toilet facilities. Mrs. Beutler said she has no plans to rent the structure but would like to retain it for storage purposes. She noted that it is only 900 s.f and the proposed residence has a 1200 • s.f footprint. Mr. Beutler said there is no room in the garage for storage. She is willing to remove the bathtub and water if necessary. Mrs. Beutler said the restrictive covenant would transfer with the property if sold in the future. Lindquist read statements from the November 25, 1997 Council meeting indicating Council's rationale for removing the heating and plumbing facilities. Council Member Goetten referred to Resolution#2196. The conclusions state that prior to certificate of occupancy, the applicants would have to remove all heating and plumbing facilities. Mrs. Beutler asked if heating is allowed in an accessory structure. Lindquist said he did not believe the Council would change their opinion, and he would only approve the variance as previously approved without any further changes. McMillan said the applicant has the right to know what is allowed in an accessory structure. Bressler asked Vang to explain. Vang said unit heaters can be installed. The problem with the current heating system is that it is a complete furnace. Vang said the Council has had discussions on this topic and currently allows a water tap in an accessory structure but prohibited plumbing fixtures. • Mrs. Beutler asked what could be done to make the structure usable. 6 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 (#5 - #2330 Robert Beutler- Continued) Lindquist said the concern is the structure being easily turned back to a residence, and the City is trying to ensure that this does not occur. Vang noted that this has happened in the past. Smith informed Beutler that from a practical standpoint, the structure would be allowed a tap with some simple type of heating unit. Mr. Beutler said he would further discuss the matter with Council. Lindquist moved, Smith seconded, to approve Application#2330 based on renewal of an elapsed variance. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#4) #2315 C. DOUGLAS AND MARILYN HOLCOMBE, 1040 AND 1056 LOMA LINDA AVENUE - Lot line rearrangement, and variances for lot area and lot width - 7:22-7:38 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicants were present. • Bressler distributed pictures of the property being proposed for a lot line rearrangement. The rearrangement would eliminate a problem where a portion of the driveway for 1040 Loma Linda is on property owned by 1056 Loma Linda. It would also provide 1056 Loma Linda with more lakeshore. The rearrangement would reduce the lot area and width for 1040 Loma Linda Avenue and 1056 Loma Linda Avenue would increase in size. Neither property meets the lot area and lot width requirements. While hardcover would increase slightly on 1040 Loma Linda, the percentage would actually decrease for 1056 Loma Linda Avenue due to additional lot area. The proposal would result in a more functional lot line. Van Zomeren informed the Planning Commission of a problem in the neighborhood due to differing opinions from surveyors regarding lot lines. This controversy may affect the property. Van Zomeren said the lot line rearrangement is an improvement of the existing situation and recommends approval. Lindquist asked who will decide which surveyor is correct. Gaffron said the six property owners affected will have to join together in a land registration proceeding to come to a conclusion. This is a long and expensive procedure. Lindquist questioned whether approval of this application would affect the problem. Vang 4110 said the setbacks may vary by as much as 18". Van Zomeren said the lot line rearrangement is internal to both lots so it can be conceptually approved. 7 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 • - Holcombe - Continued) #2315 C. Douglas and Marilyn o ) Bill Bockmann, 1090 Loma Linda, informed the Commission that the property line problem begins at 1098 Loma Linda and continue northward. Smith asked if the applicant was willing to work with the neighbors to solve the problem. Holcombe said he would like to see the issue resolved fairly. He does not believe the survey included their end of the block and his request would not have an impact on the problem. Schroeder moved, McMillan seconded, to approve Application#2315. Mr. Bockmann indicated that a revision of his survey would result in his garage encroaching on the adjacent property. Lindquist said the approval is conceptual and would not affect Bockmann. Lindquist suggested the neighbors meet to discuss the issue. Van Zomeren noted that an application would be heard in February for an average lakeshore setback variance. Hawn noted that an application request for a side lot line variance would be affected. • McMillan asked that the Council be made aware of the situation. It was indicated that the fire lane is located within the area affected and may be a solution to the problem. Smith asked that a letter be sent to the neighbors advising them of the situation. McMillan informed the applicant that the 1056 Loma Linda property exceeded the maximum limit for structural coverage and hardcover. Holcombe said he had no intention of increasing either structural hardcover or hardcover. The plan is based on what currently exists on the property. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Conditional Use Permit Amendment (#6) #2328 FRESHWATER FOUNDATION, 2500 SHADYWOOD ROAD - Conditional use permit amendment to update current tenant listing and to allow a corporate research center tenant- 7:38-8:16 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. • The Applicants, Mr. Brown and Mr. Burton, were present. 8 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 _ Freshwater Foundation- Continued) #2328 Freshwa ) Van Zomeren reported that the Freshwater Foundation currently has a conditional use permit to be a research facility in the B-4 Zoning District. The applicants are asking for permission to sign a lease with a corporate tenant that would enable biological research to continue in the building. Mr. Brown said negotiations are underway with an unnamed tenant, who will be leasing the entire lower level of the building, which includes the "boat room". The research the tenant will be conducting is similar to that which was previously done by the University of Minnesota and Freshwater Foundation. This lease will result in the entire building being used for research. The upper level is leased by the Watershed District and two other corporate tenants, along with the Freshwater Foundation and conference center. Brown related the history behind the building and its use. It was built by the Freshwater Foundation in 1972 with private funding for the University of Minnesota in perpetuity. The University decided to discontinue operating the facility several years ago resulting in the building being taken over once again by the Freshwater Foundation, who is primarily a publisher. The 51,000 s.f. building is a first rate research facility according to Brown. The proposed lease will allow the Foundation to continue educating people regarding fresh water. Van Zomeren asked if the Planning Commissioners would allow the use to continue as a research facility and make a recommendation to the Council to amend the CUP. Smith asked what the research would involve. Brown said the major part of the research will be related to processed water. He did not wish to elaborate further on the tenant's research. There were no public comments. Schroeder asked who the tenant would be for the lower level. Brown said the prospective tenant is a major midwestern corporation involved in biological and chemical research. Smith asked if there were safety concerns to consider. Brown said the corporation was highly responsible. Smith asked how the City can verify the conditions. Van Zomeren said the inspector will review it. Brown elaborated that the research is subject to many levels of investigation and agency control. McMillan asked how the lease would affect the LMCD, who currently is leasing an office in the lower level. Brown said the LMCD is willing to move if appropriate accommodations can be found. The space available on the upper level is not large enough 411 for the LMCD use. 9 A. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 • - (#6 - #2328 Freshwater Foundation Continued) Hawn asked if it is the owner or leasee who obtains the conditional use permit. She said she is uncomfortable with approving an application without an understanding of the tenant's use of the facilities. Hawn said she would consider approval with appropriate signatures sought of designated agencies involved in overseeing the research. Without that information, Hawn felt she would not know what she would be approving. Brown said he thought the CUP was for the owner. Van Zomeren said the CUP is for the use and done for both a tenant or an owner. She said the current CUP allows for research facilities in the building. Van Zomeren said the conditional use can be reviewed and subject to conditions. Smith would like staffs involvement in being satisfied that the steps were in place with the appropriate governmental agencies. Lindquist agreed with Hawn's concerns but supported the conditional use. He feels the research should be reviewed and would be satisfied with it being conducted by staff. Hawn asked what agencies would be scrutinizing the research. Brown said he was not familiar with it noting approvals require alot of paperwork and many levels of screening. • The lease requires the tenant to meet standards of local, state and federal agencies. Brown did not believe the University of Minnesota was required by Orono to have a CUP. Hawn said she was confused in that other research facilities have not been asked for a CUP in the past but a CUP is being requested for this particular use. She asked that more information be provided on which to base a decision. Brown said the CUP has already been granted. He asked staff if the use of the lower level by another research facility would be within the use allowed under the CUP. He felt it was an issue of occupancy. Schroeder referenced Resolution#3561 for the conditional use permit. He did not feel there was any need to obtain approval by the City since research would still be conducted as allowed by the CUP. Van Zomeren said the University of Minnesota did not require City approval but the Freshwater Foundation needs to obtain a CUP. She wanted assurance that what is being conducted within the building by a corporation is consistent with the CUP previously approved. She noted the use is similar but being conducted by a corporation rather than the University. • to MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 (#6 -#2328 Freshwater Foundation- Continued) Van Zomeren noted that the parking is based on square footage and no changes are being made. Brown noted that they have another building site for additional parking if needed. Hawn asked that a list of permitting agencies be sought and agreements stating the tenant has meet conditions. Brown felt a list of agencies might be possible to obtain but the agreements fluctuate. Hawn suggested obtaining a copy of the permit from the agencies. Brown felt this might conflict with confidentiality of the research. He noted that the corporation was leasing the entire lower level to provide a level of security. Discussion was had regarding whether documentation by agencies assuring staff of requirements being met by the tenant with review in six months would be satisfactory. Schroeder informed the applicant that the Commission was concerned that no manufacturing take place in the facility. Hawn said the concern was also for hazardous materials being in place. Hawn wanted to see that the applicant was required to do the documentation for the staff Brown felt this could be worked out. He felt the complexities of the research would be difficult to understand. Schroeder moved to approve the continuation of the conditional use specific to a corporate tenant with the condition that during the first year of occupancy, review be . conducted in six month intervals. The applicant is also to provide a written report from governmental agencies identified and involved that the tenant is in compliance. Brown said he felt the agencies might not be aware of all the regulations required. McMillan suggested the concerns be passed on to the Council. Schroeder suggested a statement be signed by the tenant stipulating their understanding of the conditional use and agreement to abide by it as part of the lease. Brown said the lease includes such language. Schroeder felt the use was already included in the resolution as written and felt a motion was unnecessary. Smith questioned whether the resolution needed to be amended. Schroeder felt there was no need to amend the resolution. Van Zomeren said her purpose in bringing the application before the Commission was to provide direction to the applicant to determine if the proposal was in compliance with the current permit. McMillan said only so much of the use can be discussed. Schroeder noted the meeting was also a public hearing. Hawn said the process allows for potential oversight of the activity that would be forfeited if no motion is made. Schroeder disagreed as staff has the right to oversee the conditional use. 11 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 (#6 - #2328 Freshwater Foundation - Continued) Van Zomeren read portions of the resolution, page 2, 3E, referencing the use of the building. She said there was the possibility to add to the statement that the lower level was being rented by a corporate tenant for research facility. Schroeder noted that no tenants were named in the resolution. Lindquist agreed that no action should be taken. Conditional Use Permit (#7) #2318 C.N. OSTROM & SONS FOR JEANNE MITHUN, 755 FERNDALE ROAD NORTH - Conditional use permit for a guest apartment in basement- 8:16- 8:28 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was present. Bressler reported that the application is a proposal to convert basement space into a guest apartment for use by relatives with an exterior door added for emergency egress. A second kitchen and bathroom facilitated the need for the conditional use permit for a non- rental guest apartment. Bressler reviewed the findings as noted in the packet. An existing • staircase in the garage area leads to the lower level. The main access to the basement unit is not through the main living area, which does not meet the intent of the code. A construction driveway will be removed once construction is completed. Construction has begun on the basement remodeling. The location of the staircase also lends to a possibility of creating a separate unit if a barrier is constructed in the garage. He noted that the basement would likely continue to be used for storage. Bressler also noted that if the CUP was denied, state law allows for granting of a variance to allow temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. This provision has not been used in the City in the past. Ostrom had no additional comments. There were no public comments. Van Zomeren reported that she had visited the site stating the basement had been constructed with no door or window resulting in the inability to have a bedroom located in the basement. She felt it was unlikely that it would used as a separate dwelling with only the north side having two windows and a door. Without remodeling, the space could only be used for storage. Ostrom said the area of the basement where the new construction is located had been a crawl space. The owner has a large extended family and would like to have space for them to stay on another level. The only access would be through the garage. 12 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 (#7 - #2318 C.N. Ostrom& Sons for Jeanne Mithun- Continued) Smith questioned what controls there would be for future owners. Van Zomeren suggested a covenant be attached to the certificate of title. Smith agreed that would be appropriate. Van Zomeren said prevention of the second driveway would be a control mechanism. Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to approve Application#2318 with the understanding that a covenant to restrict the use as a rental unit be filed and no driveway be provided to the secondary residence. McMillan noted that no interior staircase gives credence to approving the use. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Conditional Use Permit with Variances (#8) #2312 CLAUS WEILER AND RENEE MEERKINS, 1135 NORTH ARM DRIVE - Variances for an oversized accessory structure and located in front of the principal structure, side yard setback, rear yard setback, and bluff setback variance. A Conditional use permit to construct an accessory structure in on a through lot- • 8:28-8:49 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicants were present. Bressler distributed pictures of the property. The proposal is to construct an additional garage and first and second level decks on the rear of the residence. The oversized accessory structure requires variances to be located in front of the principal structure and for side yard setback at 15.96'where 30'is required. A conditional use permit is required for locating an accessory structure on a through lot. The decks require a street setback variance to be set at 19'where 35' is required, and a bluff setback variance. The property meets hardcover and structural coverage requirements. There are significant elevation changes on the property. Bressler indicated there are two portions of property, that area of the building site and lot 6, which is a separate lakeshore lot separated by undeveloped Elmwood Avenue. The proposed decks would be visible from the lake. There is an existing 3-car garage. There are sliding glass doors in place for the decks. • 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 • - (#8 - #2312 Claus Weiler and Renee Meerkins Continued) Bressler reviewed staffs recommendations. Bressler said staff recommends approval of the variance for the additional garage to be located 170' from the front lot line, and Staff also recommends a conditional use permit for a smaller garage. Staff recommends denial of the side setback variance and bluff variance. Staff recommends approval of the rear yard setback variance. Staff said the non-conforming shed should either be moved or removed. The applicant will remove the shed if the accessory structure is allowed. The applicant had no comments at this time. There were no public comments. Lindquist was informed by the applicant that they did not understand the bluff issues. Meerkins said the decks were in poor condition and were removed when the house was resided. Bressler said staff had not been aware that there were decks previously on the residence. Weiler said the decks ran the length of the house and extended 7-8'. Van Zomeren indicated that the permit for residing did not note the existence of decks. Weiler informed Schroeder that the additional garage was proposed at 25'x45' but would • be changed to 22'x45' or 990 s.f to meet the 1000 s.f. requirement. The extra garage will be used to store boat, lawn equipment, bicycles, and other storage uses. It was noted that the bluff requirements became law in 1992 after the residence was built, including the decks. Hawn said she would support construction of the decks at the same size as previously existed. Weiler said he could obtain pictures to determine the previous size. Weiler and Meerkins agreed with constructing the decks at the same size as previously existed. Lindquist said he would agree with denial of the variance for the oversized accessory structure as proposed. Weiler said he would agree to the size limitation of less than 1000 s.f. Hawn noted that the 15' side setback would then meet the requirement eliminating the need for a side setback variance. The applicants were asked to redesign the accessory structure and gain information on the decking. Schroeder moved, Smith seconded, to table Application#2312 subject to a new design plan for the accessory structure and determination of original deck sizes. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. • 14 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 (#8 - #2312 Claus Weiler and Renee Meerkins - Continued) Van Zomeren noted that the building permit taken out on 7/2/94 for residing did not include a survey of the decks. Variances (#9) #2320 CHRISTOPHER AND MARY SMITH, HAVING AN INTEREST IN 3650 CASCO AVENUE - Variances for an average Lakeshore setback to add a bay window over an existing deck This item was tabled at the request of the applicant. (#10) #2322 STEVEN N. FILIPS, 2570 THOROUGHBRED LANE - Variance for a fence within 50' of a rear lot line on a through lot- 8:49-9:00 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was present. Gaffron reported that the applicant requests an after-the-fact approval to construct a 6' high privacy fence along the rear of the through lot. Information was incomplete when the applicant was advised that no variance was required. A variance is required for any fence over 3-1/2' in height on a through lot. The Council suggested the applicant submit the request for review by the Planning Commission and to allow a temporary variance. Car headlights create a problem from Truffula Trail. The fence is located on the rear third of the property and is technically within a non-city protected type 1 wetlands. The covenants require adherence to other agency regulations. Vegetation will be planted that in time will negate the need for the fencing. Gaffron said the City's intention is not to have any 6' fences where there are through lots. A 3-1/2' high fence needs to be 50' in from the lot line. Gaffron reviewed the hardship statement and issues for discussion as found in the information packet. He noted the peculiarity of this property in contrast with other properties due to its location directly across from an intersection. Headlights shine directly into the residence across the rear yard. Gaffron related the conditions of approval necessary if a recommendation is made for a temporary variance. This includes providing a landscaping plan with a time schedule for removal of the fencing, conformity requirements of the fence, and advisement to the applicant with meet any standards established by other government agencies having jurisdiction over the wetlands. • 15 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 - - (#10 #2322 Steven N. Filips Continued) Smith questioned whether a 3-1/2' high fence could remain in the wetland area. Gaffron said this would have to be discussed with the Corp of Engineers. Filips said he was informed that the issue needed to be resolved with the City first before review by the other agency. Filips said he would need two growing seasons before removal of the fence. Lindquist noted there were fir trees on the property. Filips said he would need more screening than those trees provide. There were no public comments. Lindquist said he would not want to see fencing placed on other lots and asked that the fence be removed within three years. Schroeder agreed that the fence should not have been constructed but noted the unique headlight problem. Filips also noted that there are numerous tree stumps on the lot indicating trees have been removed. He said other properties in the area have more vegetation. Schroeder moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve Application#2322 for an after-the-fact variance for the 6' temporary fence to be removed in a time period not to exceed 2-1/2 110 years from this date to allow the vegetation plan to replace the fencing due to the problem with headlight glare. McMillan questioned whether there was room to plant trees in front of the fence. Lindquist said the vegetation plan could allow trees to be placed on either side of the fence. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#11) #2325 LAKE COUNTRY BUILDERS ON BEHALF OF JOHN AND CINDY OLSON, 950 NORTH ARM DRIVE - Variance for bluff setback to add a porch and replace an existing deck to an existing residence- 9:00-9:19 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. A representative of Lake Country Builders was present. • 16 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 • (#11 _ #2325 Lake Country Builders for John and Cindy Olson - Continued) Van Zomeren reported that the applicants propose to remove the existing deck on the lakeside of the residence and replace it with a deck, stairs, and a 18'x22' screened porch to the north side of the residence. A bluff setback variance is required. The existing residence straddles the bluff line at the required setback. Van Zomeren noted that almost any new construction or remodeling would require a variance from the setback due to bluff and location of CoRd 51. Van Zomeren said the porch will be on pylons requiring minimal grading. Other setbacks are met. Regarding the bluff issue, the topography severly impacts this lot, more so than any other adjacent lots. The residence is also closer to the road than the other neighboring homes. Van Zomeren indicated that the existing deck was in poor condition. She questioned whether the applicant should be allowed to expand or add more structure to a lot that today would not be allowed to be considered buildable. The Shoreland Ordinance came into effect into 1992, and the house was built in 1983. The builder said the porch would be 14'x18' with the deck continuing around in front of the porch. He referenced a letter in the packet from the home owners regarding the hardship and their intentions. Interior remodeling is currently underway. The builder indicated the only other location for the deck would be off the master bedroom. He noted • the lot is large but the unbuildability of the property creates the hardship. The builder said the owners are ecologically minded and have no plans for any further additions. During public comments, John Erickson asked if the additions would be in front of the 75' setback from the lake. Van Zomeren replied to the negative. Lindquist indicated that the construction is basically on top of the bluff The builder reported that the elevation only drops 4-1/2'from the front to the back of the home resulting in a flat building pad. The bluff drops off from the deck location. He verified the poor condition of the deck. Lindquist and McMillan said they would both deny any new structure on top of the bluff The builder asked the intention of the bluff ordinance. Lindquist said the intent is to eliminate any impact on the bluff The builder noted that post footings would be used resulting in no ecological impact or excavation. He asked for consideration of the hardships with the unique land and house setting. He feels the situation when evaluated on a case by case basis would not set a precedent in allowing the deck and porch. The builder said the adjacent homes are closer to the lake and have screened porches and additions. • 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 • - Lake Country Builders for John and Cindy Olson- Continued) (#11 #2325 a ry Y Smith indicated that the ordinance came into effect after the residence was built. She would allow replacement of existing structure but could not approve the addition of structure. Smith noted there could be an impact on erosion as well, which would have an accumulative effect. McMillan noted the presence of sliding glass doors. The builder said one door is on the lakeside to the deck. The other door is part of the addition and located off of a bathroom. He would have to make the door stationary if no deck is allowed. It was noted that the 8'x8' deck is included in the information but not shown on the survey. This deck would be located in the bluff impact zone. Lindquist informed the builder that he could not approve this deck. The builder said the ordinance allows for no further construction on this home. Lindquist said there are many homes in Orono in a similar situation. The builder asked if a screen porch could be screened in on the existing deck. Lindquist said it was a probability. The builder agreed to table the application in order to redesign the deck. Schroeder moved, Lindquist seconded, to table Application#2325 subject to redesign of the deck. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (A short break was held.) • (#12) #2296 ROBERT BREDESON, 1395 REST POINT ROAD- Variances for lot area, lot width, lakeshore setback, structural coverage, rear yard setback, and hardcover to construct a new residence on a vacant lot and a fence forward of the lakeshore setback-9:28-9:58 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was present. Bressler reported the proposal is for the construction of a 1,166 s.f residence with an attached 520 s.f garage on a lot of record not meeting current zoning district requirements. An encroaching fence into the 75' lakeshore setback is also proposed. Variances required for the proposal include lot area, lot width, lakeshore setback, rear setback, structural coverage and hardcover in the 0-75' and 75-250' lakeshore setbacks. Bressler showed the Commissioners what the allowable building pad would be. He referenced a table located on page 4 of the packet showing the lot sizes in the neighborhood, which also do not conform to current zoning. Bressler noted that the property was not assessed for sewer. There is a "Y" service at the sewer main in the street for a possible future sewer stub. He also indicated that the • property is at the 932.5' elevation. This low elevation would not allow for a basement. 18 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 (#12 - #2296 Robert Bredeson- Continued) Another concern is the lift station located on the northeast corner. It was incorrectly installed. The applicant is to be compensated and a utility easement required. It was determined in 1972 that there was no need to reassess the value of the property due to the lift station because it did not decrease its buildability. The zoning requirements have not changed since that time. The history of the land value indicates a discrepancy with the two adjacent properties, which questions whether the lot was taxed as a buildable lot. Bressler reference a letter from City Attorney Barrett, which indicates that if the property was deemed unbuildable, it would not be a taking and would not deprive the property owner of its use. Bressler reviewed the issues 1-11 as noted in the information packet. He then reviewed considerations for the Commission to approve or deny and issues regarding the buildability of the lot. (See pages 5-9 of the packet.) Bredeson said he was unaware of the structural coverage limitation of 1500 s.f until recently. He said he is willing to reduce the size of the residence. He indicated that the change would affect the average lakeshore setback. Regarding the lift station, Bredeson said the City planned on placing it in the corner and adding shrubbery and controls, which was not done. • There were no public comments. Schroeder asked if the applicant received any settlement for the lift station. Bredeson said he received $925 to reimburse him for his attorney fees but not for the easement. Lindquist asked if an offer of$2,000 was made for the easement. Bredeson said an attempt was made at that time to reduce the value of the land. Lindquist asked if a sewer charge was made to the property. Bredeson said he did not believe so because the tax rate was less due to the vacancy of the land. Lindquist questioned, with the small lot and the lack of a sewer charge, whether the lot was ever considered buildable. Bredeson said other lots in the neighborhood are similar in size with the same setback. He feels that no precedent would be set if the lot was deemed buildable as there are no other vacant lots. Hawn said the other homes were built many years ago prior to current zoning regulations. She informed Bredeson that the Commission has never granted variances for a house of this size on such a small lot since zoning regulations were put into effect. Without the sewer assessment, Hawn feels the history of the property indicates that there was no intention for this lot to be buildable. John Erickson, 1620 Shadywood, noted his concerns about prior sewer projects done in the City. • 19 1 )l MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 (#12 - #2296 Robert Bredeson - Continued) Lindquist indicated that the size of the lot is key to whether the lot is buildable. Bredeson. noted that homes have been built on 45'wide lots. Smith referenced information provided regarding variances received for properties in the neighborhood and the pattern of lots approved for building. She questioned how this chart factors into today. Bressler said there were not many changes. Lindquist noted the subject lot is only 7600 s.f. Van Zomeren informed the Commission that the study is from the years 1980-1987, which shows a substantial difference in the year built. Bredeson said there were lots on the west side with only 60' of frontage. Lindquist agreed but noted that when review is of lots that have been approved for building, some lots were found too small on which to build a house. Bredeson said homes have been built, but Smith countered that the homes are not being built today. Schroeder referenced the memo from City Attorney Barrett regarding this issue. If variances were denied, it would not be considered a "taking" and the property owner would still derive use of the property without building on it. It was explained to the applicant what is a "taking". Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to deny Application#2296 based on the number of variances necessary, the minimal size of the lot, the lack of a sewer assessment, and the • City Attorney's memorandum stating that it would not be a taking if denied. Bredeson questioned what would be allowed. Smith suggested that perhaps the adjacent properties would be interested in purchasing the land. Bredeson said he felt the proposal would improve the area. Schroeder noted this presented a difficult situation, and given the size, history, and number of variances needed, he viewed the property as being unbuildable. Schroeder felt the City would take the view that building on the property would not be an improvement because of its small size. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#13) #2319 RON LAUER, 1040 TONKAWA ROAD - Variances for hardcover to remove an existing residence and construct a new residence- 9:58-10:22 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicants were represented by Builder, Ron Lauer, and Architect, Bruce Schmidt. • 20 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 (#13 - #2319 Ron Lauer- Continued) Gaffron reported that the proposal is a request for hardcover variance in the 75-250' setback to remove the existing house, swimming pool and garages, and construct a new home on this 1.85 acre lot. The property is in the 1 acre zoning requiring a 140' minimum width. The property meets 80% of that requirement at 127'width at the lakeshore and 75' setback with a functional width of 112'. Additions were made to the residence in 1985 and 1986 for a pool and garage. Once plastic under landscaping was removed, these additions resulted in a total of 39.4% hardcover in the 75-250' setback. A certificate has been issued for removal of the pool. The proposed new residence will be 199' from the lake meeting the average lakeshore setback. Gaffron reported that 28% of the 34.5% is structural coverage; the remaining being sidewalk, patio, and driveway. The proposal should improve the grade for drainage. Gaffron reviewed the hardship statement criteria. He noted that the residence could be built without requiring a variance. He feels the resale is always an issue for the applicants and is not unique to this property. Gaffron said economics is the primary factor noted by the applicant. Topography to the rear is a factor. The property is wider than other neighboring lots. Gaffron said the only difference found for hardship is the topography issue. • While the Casco Point and Rest Point areas have been granted variances, Gaffron said this has not occurred in other areas and not for properties of 2 acres and 112'widths. Gaffron noted areas to the north where efforts were made to meet the hardcover requirements. There are smaller lots to the south where the shoreline juts out, many of which have not yet been remodeled. Gaffron indicated that the proposed house would be in line with other homes. If the house was pushed back on the lot, the property would come closer to meeting the hardcover requirement. Gaffron reviewed the issues for discussion, #1 and#2, as noted in the packet. Lauer introduced Mr. &Mrs. Buxton, who propose to build the residence. Lauer indicated the problem with pushing the house back on the lot would bring it into a big hill with trees and would require tall retaining walls and removal of trees. Schmidt noted that the average lakeshore setback would also be affected. Lindquist asked how far back the home would have to be placed. Schmidt said the placement would be past the point of maintaining any views of the lake. Gaffron said the majority of the driveway would be into the 250-500' zone. Lindquist asked if the large turnaround was necessary. Lauer said he believed so. Hawn asked if a circle could be used. Schmidt felt it would require as much area and would affect the hill. Schmidt informed Gaffron that the driveway is proposed at about 12'wide. 21 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 r - Continued) - #2319 Ron Lauer ) The house is about 3500 s.f. Schroeder felt the home could be made smaller. In that case, Schmidt said they would prefer to move the driveway back into the hill, which to him would not make sense. Lindquist informed Schmidt that the intent is to build new construction without requiring any variances, which sometimes requires tree removal. There were no public comments. Hawn reported that while visiting the property there did not appear to be major trees within 5-6' of any building area. She did not believe moving the house back would interfere greatly. Lauer presented another proposal for location of the house. Hawn inquired about the hardcover amounts. Lauer said the 75-250' hardcover would be about 30% with parking area being located behind the 250' setback line. Schmidt said the size of the patio and sidewalk would be reduced. It would require cutting of 6-8 trees. Schroeder reiterated that other homes in the area have been built without variances and lots are not substantially different. • Gaffron inquired about the relationship this proposal would have to the hill and house location. Lauer said a smaller home is located 56' from the lake to the south and the point recedes back affecting the average lakeshore setback. McMillan asked if 30% hardcover was possible in the 75-250' setback. Lauer said it was possible. Schroeder asked about meeting the 25% requirement. Lauer said it would require pushing the home into the hill. Schroeder presented the possibility of decreasing the size of the home noting he would like the hardcover to be at a maximum of 25%. A member of the audience, who is a Realtor, felt the 30% hardcover requirement was consistent with the neighborhood, felt the reduction from 40%to 30% shows an improvement, and requiring less would be irresponsible of the Commission. Schroeder objected to that comment. The Realtor said a 10% reduction would be enviable and did not mean to criticize the Commissioners themselves. Mr. Buxton said the 25% hardcover requirement could be met by pushing the home back into the hillside. He reported that the hill is not large but has a woodland abutting it. Buxton said the change would make the driveway entry awkward and remove some of the value of the woodlands. He feels there needs to be enough room for parking during the winter months. He felt there would be substantial changes to the proposal if the variance was not allowed. 22 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 • (#13 - #2319 Ron Lauer- Continued) Robert Edmunds, 1030 Tonkawa, said he was not in favor of requiring the house to be moved back into the hillside. He reported there is a history of significant drainage problems, which would increase with retaining walls and cutting into the hillside. He noted the problem with the lakeshore cutting back in that area. Edmunds did not want to see the City strictly adhering to the 25% hardcover requirement in building the large homes due to the expensive properties. He did not feel it would make sense to maintain the footprint and building as it currently exists. Smith acknowledged the public's awareness of the area but felt the residence could be decreased in size. She noted additional hardcover can also affect drainage and feels it is important to maintain the reasonable limit of 25% hardcover. McMillan moved, Hawn seconded, to approve Application#2319 for a hardcover variance of 30% in the 75-250' setback. Vote: Ayes 3, Hawn, McMillan, Lindquist; Nays 2, Smith, Schroeder. The application will be presented to Council at their January 26, 1998 meeting. (#14) #2323 TIM NELSON ON BEHALF OF DAVID POMIJE, 3120 NORTH • SHORE DRIVE- Variances for hardcover to build an addition to an existing residence- 10:22-10:42 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was represented by Tim Nelson. Van Zomeren reported that the 1.9 acre property is located in the LR-1B Zoning District. The applicant filed for a hardcover variance, but the proposal would also require a conditional use permit if the proposed guest apartment on the second floor were allowed. The remodeling includes adding another wing to the home, additional driveway, including access to a lower level storage area. The current 75-250' hardcover is 25.6% and proposed at 35.2% for an increase of 7.2% for the 9,552 s.f. residence. Van Zomeren noted that the architect did prepare an alternative plan, which is not preferred by the applicant. The alternative plan creates an effect of a long facade along the property line. This plan would require driveway and building realignment for hardcover compliance in each setback. Van Zomeren said, along with the lack of lot area for a guest apartment, there is the issue of its use. A request for tradeoff of what can be done in the 75-250' setback for transfer into the 250-500' setback is a consideration. Van Zomeren indicated that the hardship 4111 criteria is not met as it is a creation of design. 23 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 110 (#14 - #2323 Tim Nelson for David Pomije - Continued) Nelson said the plan was to work with the neighbors and present a sensible plan. The intention was for additions that would be less obtrusive to the neighbors. He said that a solution to the hardcover issue could be to pitch the driveway to drain away from the lake and produce a situation beneficial to all. Nelson said the existing garage enters from the side. Front loading requires more hardcover. He noted that new construction would have enabled the house to be located farther back on the lot. Nelson said the neighbors did not object to the plan and prefers an addition that does not project outward. Lindquist informed the representative of the difficulty in obtaining approval for more than 25% of hardcover in the 75-250' setback. Regarding the theory of trading hardcover zones, Smith informed the representative of the need to meet the guidelines. There were no public comments. McMillan asked if a variance was sought for the remodeling of one wing. Van Zomeren said the small amount of hardcover that exceeds 25%was difficult to detect. McMillan asked if consideration was given for the addition when the remodeling begun. • Pomije said the idea for the addition was always there but the timing was a different matter. He is attempting to tie it into the remodeling at this point. McMillan informed him that she would have preferred to see the overall scheme together. Lindquist said he did not support the hardcover variance. Pomije said the designers were attempting to think the whole plan out now. The owner did not see the need to build the entire plan at this time. The intent is to determine what can be done. Hawn asked what the need is for the additions. She was informed that the applicant had a large family. Van Zomeren explained the uses and floor plan. A staircase would be added. Space would be utilized for storage. One level would be a terrace, work shop, yard, and more storage. The second story would link to the main structure with a kitchen area, great room, bathroom, and guest area. The master bedroom on the second floor could not access the guest area, also on second floor. The access would requiring going down a staircase in one wing and across the foyer and up another staircase to the guest house. Van Zomeren said this could result in a duplex-type arrangement. • 24 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 (#14 - #2323 T i Nelson for David Pomije- Continued) Hawn said she did not believe adding 10% hardcover to accommodate recreational vehicles constitutes a hardship. She felt the 3-4 garage stalls should be adequate. Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to deny Application#2323. It was noted that the differentiation from the last improvement proposal to the property was the increase in hardcover. Bill Kranz, construction manager, informed the Commission that the needs of the owner include storage for jet skis, snowmobiles and room for his extended family. He said a separate storage garage for toys could be built and meet code. He said they were trying to meet with neighbors to present the best plan. The phases do not need to be connected. Kranz said the owner would like to maintain inside storage. The apartment concept was a thought to assist the owner's family, and there was no intention to make it into rentals. Kranz said the drainage currently runs to the house down to the lake; that would be changed to move drainage away from the lake. It was noted by the representative that the first 100'from the lakeshore is in complete compliance with code. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. The application will be heard at the February 9, 1998 Council meeting. Request for Finding of Substantially Similar Use (#15) #2331 MARC GILLETT HAVING AN INTEREST IN 2160 WAYZATA BOULEVARD - Request for finding of substantially similar use to allow a go-cart business to locate in the Orono Mall - 10:42-11:10 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was present. • 25 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMNIISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 • (#15 - #2331 Marc Gillett - Continued) Van Zomeren reported that the application is to find in favor of the applicant that a go- cart business is an appropriate use in this zoning district. The applicant is requesting to lease 800-1200 s.f of commercial space from Bill Wear in the Orono Mall to sell go-carts and accessories. This is currently not a permitted use. Van Zomeren suggested it could be a similar use to that of a hobby or bicycle shop. She referenced the list of permitted and conditional uses as noted in the packet. The question for the Commission is to determine whether this use should be allowed in the B-1 Zoning District or whether appropriate in another zone. The application would be subject to conditions relating to hours of operation, repairs, lighting, etc. Van Zomeren reported that the intent of the B-1 Zoning District is to supply commodities and services to the surrounding neighborhood. This use would serve a larger area. She asked if go-cart sales is compatible with this zoning. Marc Gillett distributed information and pictures relating to go-carts. He said it is a safe sport in a controlled, fun environment. He was asked how he proposes to keep people from operating the go-carts around the building. Gillett said the go-carts would have to be operated on a test track. The local • track is found at the Dakota Technical School in Rosemount. The clearance for these vehicles is less than 1" so it is not practical to test drive them off-track. Test driving would not be allowed on site. Hawn asked about the size of the go-cart and delivery. Gillett said the go-cart would fit in the back of a pick-up truck and weighs about 140 lbs. with a child in it. Delivery service could be arranged. The carts are powered by a 5 horsepower Briggs engine. There would be about three on display. McMillan asked about repair work. Gillett said the go-cart comes in as a frame in a box and is assembled with an engine. It would then be taken to the test track. A vacuum system would be used for running the engine. There is the possibility of silencing the sound. Gillett said the sound is similar to that of a vacuum cleaner running. Gillett said he would not have to run the engine in the shop. It was later questioned how any repair work could be tested if the engine was not allowed to run. Schroeder was informed that the go-carts carried a warranty when purchased. Schroeder questioned whether the engine repair would be greasy. Gillett said the shop would not be greasy. Hawn questioned why the applicant wanted the business in Orono when the test track is in • Rosemount. Gillett said he lives in nearby Minnetrista. 26 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 (#15 - #2331 Marc Gillett - Continued) ) Van Zomeren said she had a signed statement from Bill Wear. The retail space is that of the old library. There were no public comments. McMillan questioned why the use would be different from that of a sport goods store. Van Zomeren said that was a possibility but did not think of engines as being part of that use. Gillett noted there was merchandise being sold as well. Schroeder moved, McMillan, to request that this use be considered substantially similar to a sporting goods store. Hawn felt the involvement with engines showed a substantially different use from sporting goods stores. She felt the request should be treated as a conditional use in order to set controls. Schroeder amended his motion to recommend a text amendment to allow selling of go- carts in the B-1 with performance standards and service. McMillan declined to second the amended motion. • The possibility of the conditional use of (A)garages for servicing and repair of automobiles with repair functions taking place in a totally enclosed building was considered. A member of the audience asked if lawnmowers were sold and serviced in Orono. He was informed that this did not occur in Orono. They may be sold in a hardware store, however. Schroeder moved to recommend an amendment to the B-1 to add a conditional use under (A) to add go-carts to the automobiles for servicing and repair. Van Zomeren said this would involve a text hearing and public hearing, and 4/5ths Council approval. The applicant would then have to apply for a conditional use. The motion failed for lack of a second. Lindquist moved, Smith seconded, to deny Application#23331 due to the lack of finding substantially similar use under permitted or conditional uses. Schroeder felt if garages for automobile repair and service were allowed, this use should . also be allowed. Smith felt the other tenants may not agree. Schroeder said the owner could make that determination. 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 • -(#15 - #2331. Marc Gillett Continued) Van Zomeren asked if Mr. Wear wanted a hardware or paint store, whether the store would be allowed to repair snowblowers or lawnmowers. She was informed that this could probably happen. Smith added that she would hope a response to neighborhood complaints would happen. Curt Krantz, 2120 Fox Street, received clarification that the use was being considered for the Wear Building. He asked if the use was based on the building or merchandising of the item. Lindquist informed him that it would include both the merchandise and repair of go- carts. Krantz was informed that the equipment company across the street from the Wear Building is in Long Lake. McMillan informed him that this use was not included as a permitted use at this time. He asked if the concern was over noise or grease. Lindquist said his concern was for noise. Smith concurred. Gillett indicated that the engine noise could be silenced and suggested that be a condition. Smith said it would be difficult to control. Hawn asked if the stipulation can be placed that no engine running could be allowed. Gillett said he would favor that option as his goal is for exposure of the go-carts. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 1, Schroeder. It was suggested the applicant speak with Staff regarding such use in the Navarre area. • Zonin g Code Amendments (#16) #2332 AN AMENDMENT TO SECTION 10.44 OF THE ZONING CODE TO ADD CAR SALES AS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IN THE B-5, LIMITED NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICT,WHERE THEY ARE CURRENTLY NOT ALLOW - 11:10-11:24 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Van Zomeren reported that the applicant has withdrawn his request. However, Mr. Katainan, owner of the Bay Furniture Store, submitted a letter asking for ideas for use of the building, especially in regards to display and storage. Katainan is present and asking for guidelines. Katainan said the applicant, Mr. Bury, has renewed his previous lease alleviating the urgency of moving forward with the application. Katainan would like to review the issue, however, regarding display, storage, and aesthetics. Katainan noted the availability of additional parking on the property. • 2S MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 • - - Continued) #2332 Zoning Code Amendment ) Lindquist informed Katainan that a few display cars was satisfactory. Schroeder said the concern was not with the sale of classic cars but with a used car lot. McMillan added that it also would have required amending the code as the use did not fit in with permitted or conditional uses as written. Schroeder said he would have supported the application if all vehicles would be stored inside. Lindquist noted the applicant did not wish to be limited. Schroeder said economics necessitated the need for the applicant to sell late model cars as well. Mr. Katainan asked if Mr. Bury resubmitted his application later in the year, whether the Commission would consider it. Lindquist was informed that Katainan has reviewed the list of permitted uses. Lindquist said the possibility was there to add to that list. He suggested Katainan speak with staff regarding how a use might fit into one of the permitted categories. A public hearing would be required to amend the ordinance. Katainan said he would not want to pursue it if the probability of approval was narrow. He was informed that the process requires at least two-three months. Katainan volunteered to assist in the review of the permitted uses. He was informed that he should allow enough time for the process to be completed if another application is submitted. • (#17) #2333 AN AMENDMENT TO THE SECTION 5.40, LICENSING OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF ORDINANCES,AND SECTION 10.02, DEFINITIONS, AND SECTION 10.20, SUBD. 4, ACCESSORY USES, TO DEFINE HOME OCCUPATIONS AND ESTABLISH REGULATIONS - 11:24-11:38 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Van Zomeren reported that the draft ordinance regarding home occupations is based on work sessions held by the Planning Commission. She received information from City Attorney Barrett regarding firearm dealers for their review. The 1985 legislature removed from municipalities the ability to govern the sale of firearms. It was reinstated in 1993 and can be addressed in the zoning ordinance limiting the location of firearms dealers. A list of licensees was provided to the Commission. Van Zomeren reviewed the definition of home occupations, the accessory use, employees, exterior alterations, interior alterations, enclosed areas and accessory structures, outdoor storage, noise parking, signage, equipment and machinery, retail sales, visibility, hours of operation, customer traffic, deliveries, hazardous materials, home parties, prohibited occupations, disability provision, and enforcement as noted in the information packet. The amendment also eliminates the licensing provision for home occupation. Violations have not yet been addressed by the City Attorney. Included in the information is the text of the ordinance draft and minutes from prior meetings where the topic was discussed. • 29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 (#17 - #2333 Home Occupations - Continued) Curtis Krantz, 2120 Fox Street, voiced his approval of Staffs preference regarding eliminating licensing, strengthening the zoning regulations, and handling violations on a complaint basis. He was informed that farming is an agricultural use, not regulated as a home occupation. Krantz supported the draft but questioned the ability of City employees to enter homes and limiting the number of customers. He feels the City is overstepping their bounds by limiting the number of customers, which he feels is a restraint of trade. He asked how it would be policed. Lindquist informed him that the City would respond to complaints. Smith said the boundaries are set to use only when a complaint is received. Krantz was informed that the regulations apply to residences and a more intense business use should be located in a commercial area in order to maintain the character of residential neighborhoods. Schroeder noted the increase in traffic would not benefit a neighborhood. Lindquist said the City is attempting to place reasonable limitations on home occupation and to give people an idea on what is acceptable. He informed Krantz that the Commission is happy to hear any suggestions for changes and incorporate rules that benefit the community as a whole. Smith noted that the provisions are for response to complaints on what is reasonable and • not necessarily a mandate. Krantz agreed with handling problems on a complaint basis. He does not feel the City has the right to limit the business. Krantz asked if firearm dealers would be able to continue operation in the City. Lindquist asked Krantz to submit his name for notification of any public hearings regarding the issue. Lindquist said the matter will be discussed in the near future. Schroeder moved, Hawn seconded, to table Application#2333. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#18) #2327 ORONO DEVELOPMENT,LLC, 2380 SHADYWOOD ROAD -An amendment to Section 10.44 of the Zoning Code to allow coffee shops, bagel and pizza restaurants in the B-5, Limited Neighborhood Business District- 11:38 p.m.- 12:03 a.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicants were present. Gaffron reported that the request for an amendment to the B-5 Limited Neighborhood Business District to allow as a conditional use, three specific additional uses: 1) coffee retail sales, 2)bagel retail sales, and 3) pizza retail sales. This request is in conjunction 1111 with an application for development of the church property by Orono Development. Gaffron agreed with Mr. Krantz of the need to update the list. 30 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 (#18 - #2327 Orono Development - Continued) Gaffron noted that the B-5 District currently does not allow restaurants as such, but does include as a conditional use "candy, ice cream, popcorn, nuts, frozen desserts, soft drinks store." The Dairy Queen in the Navarre area does not function as a restaurant and does not include the "Brazier" portion as some Dairy Queens do. Of the 10,000 acres in the City, there is 5.9 acres in the B-5 District. The Navarre area has 3 acres zoned B-5, the church property, the strip mall on Blaine Avenue East to the office building, including Mr. Katainan's furniture store area and auto repair area. Gaffron reviewed the intent of the B-5 District, which was written in about 1975. Traffic problems are a consideration. Permanent uses are shown in Exhibit E. The conditional uses list was amended in October, 1996, to delete home and garden equipment rental. Gaffron reviewed the nature of the proposed uses. He reviewed the two types of restaurants as defined in the zoning code. The proposed uses are in conjunction with a bank, office and retail businesses. The proposed uses do not fit into these categories. Bagel or coffee sales could be part of Restaurant Class II. The pizza sales could be generate a fair amount of traffic. Gaffron reviewed questions for the Commission to consider regarding whether the • proposed uses are appropriate in the B-5 District as noted on page 3, questions 1-4. He noted that the B-5 District was chosen due to meet the bank's use and not the restaurant use. In the analysis, Gaffron indicated that the B-5 uses should be neighborhood oriented and must provide service to the surrounding neighborhood. He reported that certain restaurant types may create potential problems for the district and reviewed such possibilities. Gaffron indicated that if the proposed uses are allowed, staff should be directed to develop conditional use standards that would limit the operations to a scope and level appropriate to the district. Examples of such limitations were given and are noted in the packet. 411 31 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 (#18 -#2327 Orono Development Continued) Tom Dillon, Orono Development, and Mike Sepena, the General Contractor, were present. Dillon reported that the 11,000 s.f neighborhood service facility is intended for neighborhood use. He feels the coffee and bagel sales would be similar to that of a tobacco sales business and should be a conditional use as noted by candy, ice cream, etc. shops. Dillon noted the use must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan to enhance the site and community. He said he has spoken with business owners who agreed with their goals for the property. Dillon felt the coffee and bagel shop could share space. The pizza sales would be take-out only. The hours of operation would be consistent with the neighborhood. He does not feel traffic would increase. Dillon said he agrees with recommendations made by staff for an amendment to allow the use as a conditional use, which he feels is appropriate to the neighborhood and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. There were no public comments. Schroeder asked if the applicant was proposing all three uses. Dillon said they needed to know what uses would be allowed in order to approach perspective occupants. Gaflron explained for McMillan the differences between Class I and Class II Restaurants • referencing page 2 of the memo. Gaffron noted that the definitions may not apply today. Dillon said he did not feel the use fit either one of these definitions. Lindquist asked if the primary tenant has been secured. Dillon said a national bank would be occupying 3100 s.f of the 11,000 s.f. total. Schroeder was informed that the consideration for the proposed uses was not based on economics but based on retail use allotment. • Lindquist said he would agree with the coffee and bagel sales but could not support pizza sales. Schroeder was informed that there would be a separate entrance. Hawn noted that when the property was rezoned, the intent was to make it available for commercial and retail use, such as real estate office, lawyers, accountants, etc., uses that do not generate foot traffic as allowed in the B-1 District. It was not her intention to see retail food sales on this site. Dillon said the B-5 resulted in a very limited use for the site. Hawn said that was deliberately done. • 32 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 • -#2327 Orono Development - Continued) (#18 p John O'Sullivan said his original intent for inclusion in the B-5 District had food in mind. The only food in the area is at the Dairy Queen. He did not want to see fast food, which may be included in the B-1. O'Sullivan said he has spoken with people in the neighborhood, who feel the coffee and bagel sales is consistent with the neighborhood. He sees this use as the candy shop of the 1950's. Smith asked if the coffee-bagel sales purpose was to primarily serve the neighborhood or to serve area employees. Dillon said the purpose was for the neighbors and customers of the bank. The Commissioners questioned how much traffic would be generated by these uses. It was agreed that the traffic would be more than what is generated by the bank. Dillon felt the use would be subtle with the majority being take-out customers. Dillon reported that the tenants themselves determine what traffic needs they must have to generate enough business. Hawn said the B-5 District speaks of the undesirability of high traffic generators and feels the use is not compatible with this zoning district. Gaffron noted that the Dairy Queen is a seasonal business. O'Sullivan added that this particular Dairy Queen is a high volume store for a non-Brazier Dairy Queen. • John Erickson suggested taking the property to the north of O'Sullivan and zoning it all commercial. Sepena asked is the uses were substantially different from that of a Dairy Queen. Hawn said she felt the Dairy Queen was present due to its historical insertion in the district. Hawn said she is against the restaurant uses. Gaffron noted that the property was changed to B-5 from residential one year ago. Dillon said he felt the coffee-bagel use is similar to the candy, ice cream, etc. use. He will ask the applicant to amend the application to eliminate the pizza sales. Lindquist moved, Smith seconded, to approve the amendment of the B-5 for allowed conditional uses to include coffee retail sales and bagel retail sales. Schroeder felt the neighbors would appreciate these businesses. McMillan asked if the uses would be tied into the candy, ice cream, etc. category. Lindquist said the uses would be added to the list of conditional uses. • 33 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 1 (#18 - #2327 Orono Development - Continued) Gaffron said he would recommend that limitations be placed on the use as a separate line. The limitations would need to be developed. He has been given some suggestions from Shardlow, which is currently not reflected in the proposed language. Lindquist and Smith said they would like to review the language when drafted. Schroeder felt satisfied with staff handling the matter. Lindquist agreed to let staff develop the details and send it forward to the Council for review. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 1, Hawn. Council will review the application at their February 24 meeting. Commercial Site Plan Review and Variances (#19) #2326 ORONO DEVELOPMENT, LLC, 2380 SHADYWOOD ROAD- Variances for hardcover and front yard parking setback and a commercial site plan review to construct an 11,000 sq. ft. retail/service center building- 12:03-1:00 a.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicants were present. Gaffron reported that the application is a commercial site plan review and variance approval for the multi-retail building noted in agenda item#18. Variances include 500- 1000' zone hardcover and parking setback from street. The property is 1.86 acre site. Gaffron noted the property as it exists today and with proposed improvements for a bank building and retail sales. A portion of Navarre Lane was vacated last year. The site contains stormwater management ponding serving the Culver site. Gaffron reviewed the application with regards to conformity with performance standards of the B-5 District as laid out in the information packet. He noted that the building layout is similar to what has previously been shown. Gaffron reported that the hardcover is less than what is seen elsewhere in Navarre. There will be building space for 6-8 tenants. Inside floor plans are not yet available. The permitted and conditional uses are in conformance as are lot area and lot width. The front yard setback requirement is 20' minimum and proposed at 5'. The landscape architect has commented that more space should be provided for plantings. A 20' rear setback is required for the through lot but proposed at 14'. Entrance monuments are also being proposed. • 34 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 (#19 -#2326 Orono Development Continued) Gaffron indicated that fencing is not being proposed. Fencing is required, however, where the property abuts the residential district. A arborvitae hedge is being proposed. Landscape Architect Case suggested additional screening in the landscape plan. Gaffron asked the Commission to consider whether screening should be included along the Olive Avenue frontage. Gaffron reported that the City does not usually get involved with design, but the proposed buildings will be significant to the area. He reviewed the exterior finish. Elevation reviews must be provided to ensure a consistent appearance. In Staffs opinion, Gaffron said the building lacks character and consideration needs to be given to the expanse of uninterrupted roof. The only outbuilding will be a trash enclosure proposed 30' from Olive Avenue, which Gaffron feels may not be the best location. Screening of that enclosure is required and building exterior should also be compatible with the other buildings. A drainage plan has been submitted. A grading plan indicates an expansion of the retention pond existing on the site. The City Engineer has made recommendations, including the need to revisit the proposed storm sewer lines in that storm sewer and • ponding calculations need to be provided. The entire site will drain to this storm pond via grading and a series of catch basins and storm sewer lines. Gaffron said the City Engineer has commented on the grading plan submitted. He noted that design grades, especially down to Olive Avenue, are steep. Grades and slopes need to be examined and erosion control materials used. Plantings should strive for a 1:5 slope. The proposed retaining wall is over 10' in height. A pedestrian path had been discussed for location along the wall but eliminated due to the safety issue with the height of the wall. Concern was also voiced over the starkness of the wall as viewed from Olive Avenue. O'Sullivan had suggested the pedestrian path by the north lot line but felt this may be difficult to do. A path through the parking lot would need alot of review. Gaffron noted the wall would need to be screened. The building height meets requirements but the broad expanse of roof should be modified. 35 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 • (#19 - #2326 Orono Development- Continued) Gaffron reviewed the general performance standards noted in the application in relation to exterior storage, traffic control and site circulation, signage, lighting, and parking standards. The traffic will move in a counter-clockwise rotation through the bank drive- through window. Both a north and south access is proposed. Exiting traffic may be a problem with the close proximity to the Culver's Restaurant. There will be two-way traffic on the exit and in front of the building. The City Engineer suggested the use of a right-in, right-out scenario if two accesses are provided; he recommended only one access. Hennepin County will need to review this issue. The City Engineer felt the entrance was too close to the intersection. A condition was placed on the Culver's Development for another review of the access due to this issue. Gaffron said Staff questioned the need for the entrance monuments and indicated they must meet the 10' setback. More detail is required regarding lighting. The parking standards are met with 62 spaces proposed and 56 required. The code calls for one space for every 200 s.f of office space; the plan has one space for every 150 s.f of space. Gaffron said the intensity of the restaurant use can be limited by the parking. No joint parking is planned, but O'Sullivan had previously suggested overflow parking for Culver's on this site. • The setback for parking in the front is an issue for consideration. If the road expands, the parking will disappear. At least a 10'wide green strip for landscaping should be provided. The setback is also important in maintaining the natural character of the City. Gaffron reviewed how the 20' front yard could be accomplished as cited by 1-4 in the packet. He added that the building could be pushed back on the lot to accomplish#2. Gaffron said it is unclear whether the intent of the code section regarding drive-in standards applies to restaurants or general drive through services. Gaffron felt the canopy area should not impact the neighborhood except for the possibility of headlight glare, which may require screening. Gaffron expressed the need for additional landscaping due to the loss of trees on the property. Gaffron reviewed the variance requests including hardcover. He questioned the granting of the magnitude of hardcover variances considering the lack of detail or hardship statement. The question arose of whether the storm water treatment concludes that the excessive hardcover has a limited impact. Gaffron said the front parking setback should be evaluated in its regard to what is appropriate in Navarre. 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 (#19 - #2326 Orono Development - Continued) GaffIon, while acknowledging guidelines, said additional work is required on the plans. Tom Dillon noted that the 11,000 s.f building is less than what was previously planned. He anticipates a 5-6 month construction period. Dillon feels the two egress locations on CoRd 19, with the southern egress being shared with Culver's, is an improvement for the property. He noted the service window location is toward the rear of the building being the best location for both the building and the neighborhood. Dillon felt the hardcover issue was difficult to solve with the slopes, elevations, and pond. He noted the lack of flexibility with the property being within two lakeshore zones. He indicated the ponding and filtration to marsh areas will aid water quality. Dillon asked for clarification on the 20' setback requirement from Olive Avenue. It was his belief the setback would be at 23' and meet the requirement. Dillon noted he has not answered all of the concerns but will work with Staff. Mike Sepena reviewed the site plan. He referenced the confining steep elevations, which drop, for a minimum depth. Changes to this and the driveway are being kept to a minimum to reduce the need for fill. He indicated the 10'wall does taper upward. The 5' variance to the front yard setback is necessary, according to Dillon, to maintain lineal • integrity. He felt if Shadywood Road was expanded, this site is only one of many that would be affected. Gaffron clarified the setback issue. John Erickson comments that the Shadywood setback is unrealistic as the property falls away to the back. He thought the plan for planters would be an improvement. Erickson feels Olive Avenue is so narrow that it is practically a bike path now. He did not believe the neighbors would object to the parking extending to the back of the building and would most likely be the area where employees would park. Erickson is in support of bushes planted separating the retaining wall from his property, which he says would be a vast improvement to what currently exists. There were no other public comments. Schroeder agreed that a 20' setback would not be possible. McMillan said she would like to see more green space, however. Dillon said the area in front of the building on the County right-of-way is all green space, along with other areas he pointed out. Sepena also noted the open areas on the corners where landscaping could be located. Dillon said he would work with Staff on a landscaping plan. 37 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 111 - -(#19 #2326 Orono Development Continued) Dillon said he understands the need to change the roof line. He will work with Staff on the lighting plan. Dillon said he spoke with the Watershed District, who were satisfied with the preliminary plan and with the ponding, but required the City hearing prior to their formal review. Dillon indicated that a 5' setback is built in with the sidewalk separating the parking area. He preferred unrestricted ingress and egress for the two access points, especially on the south where it is shared with Culver's. Hawn asked how much more land would be required to gain two lanes of parking in front. Sepena said it would be a tradeoff and impact the rest of the lot noting 64' is at the minimum. Lindquist asked what should be added in front of the building. Schroeder suggested trees planted in pots. Dillon replied that it would create a problem with snowplowing. Smith felt that 5'would not make a difference. Schroeder indicated it would encroach on the Olive Avenue parking. Gaffron suggested bump-outs in order to save trees. Sepena said it would depend on the parking allotment. Dillon informed Schroeder that his intent is to frame the property with trees. Gaffron indicated that further work with the development on the issues is necessary. Schroeder felt the Planning Commission should see the plan again. Commissioners agreed. Lindquist asked Staff to work through the issues and develop a list of topics for discussion. Gaffron said the plan will be reviewed at the February 17 Planning Commission meeting and the February 23 Council meeting. Smith felt the two locations for access were intensive with the combined use with Culver's, the sea of concrete that would exist, and the increased traffic. She is worried about the level of activity in the area and asked Staff to review this issue. Schroeder, Lindquist, and McMillan felt that two accesses were necessary. Smith asked to see options. Schroeder indicated the building could be reduced in size but limited depthwise. Smith acknowledged the current plan is an improvement. Smith asked that the exterior design be reviewed. Schroeder suggested the drive through be located to the side to gain the 20' setback. Dillon said that was possible but would present a problem with stacking and gaining access to the back of the building if eliminated. Gaffron said a possibility is to eliminate a portion of the 20' driveway. Schroeder asked that more than 5' be provided in front. He would like to see a landscaping plan such as the 5' plus trees. Schroeder moved, McMillan seconded, to table Application#2326 for additional review of plan and work on landscaping, roof design, signage, exterior design and issues noted in this discussion. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 38 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 • -(#19 - #2326 Orono Development Continued) Dillon asked about the hardcover variance. Schroeder indicated that the building has been reduced in size. Lindquist and Schroeder were in support of the variance request. Sketch Plans (#20) #2321 DON ANDERSON, HAVING AN INTEREST IN 905 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD - to subdivide the parcel into 8 lots for residential development The Applicant was present. Gaffi-on reported that the review is of a sketch plan for the 17-1/2 acre Carpenter property located on Old Crystal Bay Road. All existing buildings will be removed. The plan calls for 8 lots with two cul-de-sacs, with septic systems and wells. Lot 8 is to be served by an individual driveway. The property also contains woodlands and a bluff feature along most of the shoreline, which will impact lake setbacks and tree preservation. The bluff located on 3 of 4 lots forces the setback to an average 150', where normally the setback is 75'. Gaffron indicated the issues for discussion include access, lot area/width standards, on-site sewage treatment, bluff impacts, tree preservation, park dedication, archaeological sites, . wetlands, and stormwater drainage. Gaffron said the code would generally limit individual access to major roadways. A change will be necessary for access to Lot 8, possibly by an outlot road. Hennepin County will also need to review access. Gaffron said the best plan would be for all lots to access from one road, but with circumstances being as they are, two roads would make sense. Gaffron reported that the lots meet the 2 acre zoning. Lot 3 does not meet the 200' width requirement. The four lakeshore lots are narrow, and the angle of the existing property boundaries with the shoreline makes it difficult to lay out the lots. The setbacks are 50' front, 30' side, 50' rear, and 75' setback from the bluff. Septic sites have been tested. There is limited building flexibility, especially for Lot 6. Steve Weckman has reviewed the sites and is concerned that the 6% slope is not being met. More mound systems may be necessary and additional review required. The bluff affects 3 of 4 lakeshore lots. Gaffi on indicated that the tree line follows the shoreline presenting pristine views from the bay, which should be preserved. He is concerned with building a corridor to the lake and suggests some limitations within the corridor to ensure that trees are not cut down to the lake. He suggested a tree conservation easement. 39 , MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 • (#20 - #2321 Dan Anderson- Continued) Gaffron said a trail corridor is laid out for the west side of Old Crystal Bay Road. Hennepin Parks has a long term intent for a trail system connecting the Luce Line to Noerenberg. Difficulty in continuing the east side trail is due to topography problems and preference has been shown for the trail continuation on the west side of the road. The subdivision will be subject to park dedication, whether by fee or land. There are no apparent wetlands on the property but confirmation will be required. A site grading plan will also be required when the preliminary plat application is filed. Issues for consideration include access and number of access points. Gaffron said Staff will scrutinize the viability of the building envelopes of specific lots noting the septic system feasibility is key to determining the number and layout of lots. The applicant will be asked for tree or woodland preservation methods as well. The applicant said Ed Otto of Otto Associates did the plan and soil testing. Anderson said he appreciates the beauty of the area and tree preservation is vital to maintaining the value of the property. Anderson said the areas most appropriate for building sites are not in the wooded areas. Smith indicated that the problem with tree and woods preservation would most likely • arise once the residences are built and resided in. Lindquist suggested the use of a restrictive covenant. Smith agreed. Anderson felt the property owners will want to maintain the trees. Schroeder asked for a plan regarding this issue. Otto responded to the issue of access. He said consideration was given to a horseshoe type connection, but the property lacked the depth and hardcover would increase. He felt the outlot option would be best for site distance. He suggested an option for Lot 8's driveway. Otto understood that the County would have to review access. Otto did not believe a frontage road would be a good option to serve Lot 8. Gaffron suggested a driveway run across the road. Otto was concerned with being too close to Old Crystal Bay Road. It was indicated that the applicant is not adverse to a bike path or easement. McMillan suggested that the only way to solve the access issue for Lot 8 may be to eliminate a lot altogether, noting Lot 7 would have a difficult building envelope. Gaffron noted that this would decrease the number of lakeshore lots to three. 40 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 • (#20 - #2321 Dan Anderson- Continued) Schroeder stated the septic regulations govern the planning of development and no exceptions would be made in regards to septic. McMillan indicated the difficulty in obtaining two septic sites for 2 acre lots. Otto said the slopes are also a concern as well as the 6%restriction. Otto indicated that the Lot 3 septic sites are 6% for the primary side on the north side and 8% for the alternate. Lindquist informed him that all septic sites must be conforming. Gaffron said sewering would make it easier for building sites, but there is no plan for sewering and the property is not within the MUSA. He noted the Council is reviewing expansion of 2 acre zoning but it is difficult to predict what will occur in the future. Plans for alternate sites are required but they may not be needed in the future. There were no public comments. (#21) #2324 JAMES RENDER,HAVING AN INTEREST IN 1365 TONKAWA ROAD - to subdivide the parcel into three lots for residential development Mark Gronberg represented the applicant. Gaffron reported that the sketch plan is for a two acre site located across from Maxwell 1110 Bay in the 1/2 acre zoning. The 3-lot subdivision will meet the width requirements in the LR-1C Zoning District. Three options are being provided for the development. Option A is the preferred layout. It would include an outlot driveway at a 30' width. A private road is required for the three lots. Lots 1 and 2 require back lot area variances where 3/4 acres is required. Option B is a modified plan with two lots abutting the County road. An outlot would serve the back lot and meet the 3/4 acre standard. Lot 3 becomes somewhat limited in its development flexibility in this scenario and would creates the need for an additional driveway access. Option C includes a short cul-de-sac and is the most conforming of the three proposals. No width variance is required but there would be alot of hardcover due to the road. There are also potential changes to the character of the neighborhood in this proposal. Gaffron reviewed the pros and cons for a cul-de-sac. This would be the shortest cul-de- sac developed to date in the City. The minimum paved width for a private road is 24' and 20' for a public driveway. The total hard surface for the entire site, including the road, would be 21,000 s.f. or 24% of the property. This assumes that all three lots are conforming to the 25%hardcover limitation in the 75-250' zone. 41 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MF,ETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 • (#21 - #2324 James Render- Continued) Staff sees both good and bad points to having a cul-de-sac. A cul-de-sac would meet code and not significant add to hardcover. A road could be developed if made private for maintenance control by the residents. Gronberg was asked what the best solution was, and he said that the owner is concerned with the use of the property by the public. The character of the neighborhood is also a concern. He felt Option A is a simpler plan with the three lots and a County road on one side. He felt there was a need for three lots. A shared driveway, however, is a possibility. McMillan was informed that Lot 1 exceeded hardcover limitations as drawn. The three lots would be limited and have similar homes. Gronberg said the owner understands that no variances are allowed. The plan is to leave the existing house on the property. Gaffron said if a cul-de-sac was built, it could be made smaller. The fire department would prefer this option for staging purposes. McMillan questioned how it could be made smaller, citing example of an island. An island would make it difficult to plow. Hawn asked what effect a shared driveway would have for the fire department. Gronberg asked whether an approved fire turn, or Y shape, could be used. Gaffron said the hardcover would be about half the amount as a cul-de-sac. • Schroeder asked Gaffron to review the fire turn or Y with the fire department. Smith said she would like to see all three driveways from a single driveway and submitted or review or with a variation of a cul-de-sac. (#22) #2329 BOB WAADE, HAVING AN INTEREST IN 3280 AND 3290 NORTH SHORE DRIVE- to develop townhouses in the LR-1C-1 District Robert and Iris Waade were present. Gaffi-on reported the sketch plan is for development of property directly east of Lakeside Marina, also known as the Straley property, which was owned for a time by the DNR for a possible access site. The proposal is to divide the property into two lots, each containing a duplex. The property is in the LR-1C-1 Zoning District and is within 200' of commercial zoning. This creates some options for the property with either duplexes or a PRD, attached units with a 3 unit per acre density. The sketch plan presented is for duplexes. This property has gone through several rezonings. The Shoreland regulations affect the property as a PRD requiring a tiering concept regarding the number of units on site, with less development, and located further back on the lot. The plan is for the duplex concept • and meeting code. 42 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 • - - (#22 #2329 Bob Waade Continued) A 30'wide outlot is proposed over the existing shared driveway serving the four existing neighboring residences and the four proposed new dwelling units. This far exceeds the City's three unit threshold for a driveway, requiring a road. The applicant is asking for an easement to serve the back lot, requiring 3/4 acre with 1/2 acre in front. 100'widths are required. One plans calls for the road to come across the north along the property line of Lot 1 to Lot 2. A 50' outlot could be a road, and Gaffron questioned whether it would need to be developed without the neighboring properties. Once option according to Gaffi-on would be a development with 7-8 townhouse units. If a PRD, it would require a 200' setback with shared or private road. If the development is as proposed, a driveway to serve 4 lots could continue to serve the houses in the neighborhood. This is however for the rest of the neighborhood. Gaffron said the duplex credit in the LR-1 C-1 District requires a conditional use on a single lot. It meets the sewered requirement, being adjacent to commercial property, and construction within 200' of the district. The property does not meet the width requirement but does meet the area requirement. Gaffron said the backlot consideration is P roblematic for hardcover. It would use the full 25% of hardcover allowed in the 75-250' zone but have a minimal driveway and apron. More detail is required. A question of lake access is also a consideration. How many of the units would receive access. Gaffron questioned whether the plan would be approved for access by the LMCD. The code stipulates lake access to as many as have title. The ability to have 4 slips on 1 dock is not probable with requirement of having lakeshore. Lindquist asked the applicant what his intentions are for the property. Waade said he would like to have 4 slips and keep the units as rental units with two separate duplex units. Lindquist asked what determinations are needed. Gaffron said the plan would require Council and LMCD review. He said code allows only 4 slips on 1 property only. Hawn acknowledged that this problem is created with the lot ownership and lakeshore as developed. Lindquist suggested for the duplex plan to create the ability for the road to serve all 7 properties with a 50' outlot rather than an easement. A decision has to be made regarding where the road is to be located, who is to build it, whether it be private or public, and if the road will be shared. 43 .x .. c , MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1998 • (#22 - #2329 Bob Waade - Continued) A width variance is required for Lot 2. If this cannot be granted, the question is whether the property can become a duplex and may require being a single family residence. The possibility is for a single family on the Lakeshore lot with a duplex to the rear. Waade said he could follow that plan but would rather have two duplexes. Lindquist asked about slips. Waade said he would like a slip for each unit. Schroeder said he should discuss this with the LMCD. Gaffron did not believe the City would allow a corridor outlot. Conditions may also have to be placed on the property where slips could be lost. Mrs. Waade asked about the road. The owner's responsibility for the road would be through Lot 1 and should be at a 28' width and paved. An outlot must be 50'. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS (#23)APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF DECEMBER 15, 1997 Schroeder moved, Smith seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of December 15, 1997. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#24) REPRESENTATIVES TO ATTEND COUNCIL MEETINGS January 23 -Lindquist February 9 - Hawn ADJOURNMENT Lindquist adjourned the meeting at 1:52 a.m. Dale Lindqui Chair Per.on 44