Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-19-2019 Planning Commission Minutes MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,August 19,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. ROLL CALL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Chair Jon Ressler, Commissioners Bob Erickson, Matt Gettman, Dennis Libby, and Mark McCutcheon. Representing Staff were Community Development Director Jeremy Barnhart, City Planners Melanie Curtis and Laura Oakden, and Recorder Jackie Young. Chair Ressler called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Gettman moved,Libby seconded,to approve the agenda as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0. APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 15,2019 Libby moved,Gettman seconded, to approve the minutes of the Orono Planning Commission meeting of July 15,2019,as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0. NEW BUSINESS 1. LA19-000049 PETER ESKUCHE,2605 NORTH SHORE DRIVE,VARIANCES AND INTERIM USE PERMIT,6:33 P.M.—6:49 P.M. Peter Eskuche,Applicant,was present. Oaken stated the applicant is requesting variances for hardcover,buildings, and retaining walls in the 75-foot lake yard, an average lakeshore setback variance, side yard setback, lot area, and an interim use permit for movement of over 50 cubic yards of dirt. This property is unique in that an inlet from Lake Minnetonka encroaches into the lot, establishing an additional 75-foot lake yard into the lot. The applicant is proposing to build a new home to replace the existing structure. The existing home sits forward of the 75-foot lake yard setback. The applicant is proposing the new home further back from the lakeshore. The proposal also includes the removal of hardcover on the west side of the property and to turn that space into a usable lawn area. To minimize the inlet encroachment,the applicant proposes to move the home closer to the east property line and into the east side yard setback. The proposal also includes new hardcover for a patio within the 75-foot lake yard. A new patio is also being proposed. Due to the existing home being located in the 75-foot lake yard, an interim use permit is required for movement of earth over 50 cubic yards in the lake yard. To remove the existing home and create a lawn space as well as construct the new home, new grading will be done with the lake yard. Staff finds the applicant is working to improve the site by working within the existing building footprint and massing of the proposed home. The new home is further from the lakeshore compared to the existing home. The applicant is also reducing the overall hardcover of the property. Due to the location of the existing home in the lake yard, grading will need to be done to remove the existing home, restore the Page 1 of 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,August 19,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. lawn, and for the new proposed home. The proposed IUP is reasonable to allow the construction of a new home. The applicant is requesting an average lakeshore setback variance due to the proposed retaining walls which exceed the 42-inch height maximum. The retaining walls will establish a flat usable lawn space along the side of the home. Retaining walls are also shown within the 75-foot lakeshore along the front/lakeside of the home. These walls will sit in the same footprint and the existing deck and will be used to create the patio/terrace area. The new home is proposed to meet the average lakeshore setback, but the building will encroach into the75-foot setback along the eastern and western edge of the home due to the property being almost entirely surrounded by lakeshore. Roughly 1,000 square feet of the new home is located outside of the existing massing and is a new encroachment in the 75-foot setback. The engineer has completed a review of the grading plan and found no issues. A more thorough review will be completed when a building permit is submitted. Comments have been received from one neighbor in support of the project. Planning Staff recommends approval of the proposed variances and interim use permit. McCutcheon asked what the pink yard depicts. Oakden indicated it is the side yard setback. The applicant is asking to be 10 feet closer to the setback than currently. Ressler asked if the proposed structure is further back. Oakden indicated the gray is the existing home and the proposed new home is depicted in black. Libby asked if the existing hardcover is depicted in green. Oakden stated the green depicts new structure. The green space sits within the proposed house and is new structure. Ressler asked if the little triangle is the 75-foot setback from the creek. Oakden indicated it is. There is a large driveway that loops for a side loading garage for the current garage and that will be turned into green space. In order to do that,they are proposing the retaining walls that are depicted in purple. The hardcover is being reduced from 21 to 18 percent. Erickson asked what the maximum height will be of the retaining walls. Oakden stated the retaining wall closest to the lake will be over 42 inches in height in one spot, which means it will be located in the average lakeshore setback and also within the 75-foot setback. Gettman asked what variances the house that is being built to the west received. Page 2 of 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,August 19,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Oakden indicated that property owner did not require any variances since the lakeshore curves, but they did receive a conditional use permit for importing of material. Resser asked if the grade is being changed on the subject property. Oakden stated it is not,and since the house is located within the 75-foot lake yard, a variance is required because they exceed 50 cubic yards. Erickson stated within the exhibits there are two drawings of the terraced area that are somewhat different and that he has a concern about that. The top of the details and the close-up of the inset mentions or labels a dry set terrace roof with a seat ledge. Erickson expressed a concern that a child could fall of that ledge and that he would like to make sure it is built with a railing. Oakden indicated that area is located in the same location as the existing house. That specific patio space does sit within the current home and does not trigger any variance requirements,but they will be required to build to building code,which does require certain railings at different heights from the grade. Peter Eskuche, Developer, stated he would be available for questions. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 6:45 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 6:45 p.m. McCutcheon noted overall the hardcover is being reduced and the structure is being moved further away from the lake. The only concern is if the neighbor to the east is the one in favor of the project. Eskuche stated it was the closest neighbor that sent the e-mail in support of the project. McCutcheon commented it is a well thought out plan and that he understands the practical difficulty with the inlet. Libby stated he is in agreement with most of the points covered by Commissioner McCutcheon and that he is in favor of the IUP as long as there is further review by Staff to ensure compliance with the building code. Erickson commented this is a unique property given the inlet and lakeshore, and that combined with the applicant's effort to make it more compliant, he would support Staff's recommendation. Gettman stated he has no issues and that the plan has been well put together. Ressler stated there are a number of difficulties with building on the lot and he appreciates the reduction in hardcover and the relocation of the structure further back. Because of that, he would be in support of the application. Page 3 of 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,August 19,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Gettman moved,Erickson seconded,to recommend approval of Application No. LA19-000049, Peter Eskuche,2605 North Shore Drive, granting of variances and an interim use permit. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0. 2. LA19-000054 JOHN KRAEMER& SONS ON BEHALF OF OCBR 1,855 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD SOUTH, 6:49 P.M.—6:58 P.M. Anthon Ellis, Charlie& Company Design,was present. Curtis stated a new home is being built on the property and will involve the export of approximately 3,200 cubic yards of material from the site to accommodate the proposed home. As a result,an interim use permit is required. The applicant proposes to export the material from the site out of the City. The proposed haul route is north on Old Crystal Bay Road South to County Road 112 and then west on County Road 112 to Maple Plain. Staff finds the proposed plan conforms to the standards of the IUP review. The material removal activity will be tied to the building permit for the new residence. The City Engineer will review the revised grading plan for conformance. No public comments have been received. The Little Orchard homeowners' association has approved the property owner's request to connect a driveway from the subject property to Little Orchard Way. Planning Staff recommends approval of the IUP to export approximately 3,200 cubic yards of material in accordance with the City Engineer's requirements associated with the overall building permit. Gettman noted at the July Planning Commission meeting there was a resident that was complaining about the truck noise and asked whether there is any additional guidance that can be communicated to the hauler. Curtis stated the contractors vary in how they handle the hauling, but it has been her experience that this contractor is very proactive in that respect. As part of the IUP request,the neighbors are notified and a public hearing is held. Gettman asked whether the City is contemplating requiring anything in addition to what is normally required. Curtis stated in her view it is not necessary in this situation and that this is a totally different situation from the project on Walter's Port. Ressler noted the majority of the roads are county roads. Anthon Ellis,Charlie &Company Design, stated he has nothing to add to Staff's report. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 6:55 p.m. There were no public comments. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 6:55 p.m. Page 4 of 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,August 19,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Gettman stated he has no issues with the application. Erickson noted Staffs recommendation includes conditions that have to do with the engineer's requirements associated with the building permit and that he would be in favor of that condition as part of the approval. Libby commented care has been taken to consult with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District,which is commendable. Libby indicated he would be in favor of the application in conjunction with those conditions recommended by Staff. McCutcheon stated the application is pretty straight forward. Ressler stated the review is to catch any unusual issues and that there does not appear to be any. Gettman moved,Libby seconded,to recommend approval of Application No. LA19-000054,John Kraemer& Sons on behalf of OCBR 1,LLC,855 Old Crystal Bay Road South, granting of an Interim Use Permit,subject to the conditions recommended by the City Engineer. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. 3. LA19-000055 HENDEL HOMES ON BEHALF OF MOLLY ZWETTLER,3345 FOX STREET,6:58 P.M.—7:05 P.M. Rick Hendel, Hendel Homes,was present. Oakden stated the applicant is requesting an after-the-fact interim use permit for exporting approximately 1,260 to 1,400 cubic yards of material while constructing a new residence. A new home was built on the property with an approved building permit. An as-built survey was submitted at the end of the project with new grading patterns located on the lot. The builder identified that roughly 90-100 trucks of excess soil was hauled off site. Each truck averaged 14 yards per load. An interim use permit is required for hauling over 500 cubic yards of materials to or from a site. Staff finds the plans would have conformed to the standards of IUP review if it was processed before the work took place. The material removal activity took place while the new home was under construction. Denial of the IUP would require the import of the exported material, resulting in additional truck traffic. As this is an after-the-fact IUP,the City Engineer had no opportunity to approve a haul route. Most times the City requests that heavy trucks minimize their time on city streets by getting to county and state roads by the most direct route possible. No public comments were received regarding the project and no complaints were made to either the Police or City Staff. McCutcheon asked if the work occurred before or after road restrictions were lifted. Oakden indicated she is not sure when the hauling took place. Page 5 of 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,August 19,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Rick Hendel, Hendel Homes, apologized for the oversight,which occurred because the homeowner changed landscaping plans midstream. The hauling occurred after road restrictions were restricted and it was never their intent to violate the City's regulations. Libby stated an additional 13 dump trucks is noticeable to the neighbors, but under the circumstances, he has no objections to the after-the-fact IUP. Hendel commented it was really bad soil as well. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 7:03 p.m. There were no public comments relating to this application. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 7:03 p.m. McCutcheon commented there were a lot of moving parts and it appears to be an oversight. Libby stated given the amount of fill hauled, a before the fact application would have been more appropriate,but that he has no objection to the after-the-fact IUP. Erickson stated he is in support of the application as recommended by Staff. Gettman commented he is uncomfortable that there was not some type of notification along the way to anyone at the City but that he is unsure how that could have been resolved. Gettman stated he has no issues with it. Ressler stated there were a lot of moving parts to the project and that he will take the contractor at his word that this was an oversight due to all the moving parts with the landscaper. Further, it would not help to import the dirt back in and this contractor does not have a pattern of doing this type of thing. McCutcheon moved, Gettman seconded,to recommend approval of Application No. LA19-000055, Hendel Homes on behalf of Molly Zwettler,3345 Fox Street,granting of an after-the-fact Interim Use Permit. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0. 4. LA18-000056 GREGG KATCHMARK, 140 LEAF STREET,VARIANCE,7:05 P.M.—7:10 P.M. Greg Katchmark,Applicant,was present. Oakden stated the applicant is requesting a creek setback variance. The property abuts the creek that flows from Lake Classen to Stubbs Bay, which is a protected tributary and subject to a 75-foot structure setback as well as the standard limitations on hardcover in the 0-75-foot zone. The applicant is proposing an enclosed porch to be built on top of the existing 16' x 24' deck. The footprint of the deck and building are not proposed to change. The variance is due to the massing increase with the addition of the roof on top of the deck. While the property was granted an enclosed deck in 2016 and the deck was constructed,the roof was not. Page 6 of 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,August 19,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. The existing home is located in a nonconforming location. The front yard setback overlaps with the 75- foot creek setback located in the rear of the yard. While the limited building envelope creates the need for a variance for any addition to the home,the proposed addition on top of the deck creates minimum impacts to the property with no change to the existing footprint and hardcover. To date,no public comments have been received. Planning Staff recommends approval. Ressler asked if this is a reapproval of something that was already approved. Oakden indicated that is correct and that the original variance has expired. Kathy Katchmark, Property Owner, stated she is here to answer any questions. McCutcheon stated the application is pretty-straight forward. Libby stated he is also in favor of the application. Erickson stated he is in favor of the creek setback variance. Gettman and Ressler indicated they are also in agreement with the approval. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 7:09 p.m. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 7:09 p.m. Ressler stated there does not appear to be any changes from the previous approval. Libby moved,Gettman seconded,to recommend approval of Application No. LA19-000056, Greg Katchmark, 140 Leaf Street, granting of a creek setback variance. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0. 5. LA19-000057 WAYZATA COUNTRY CLUB,430 OLD LONG LAKE ROAD, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCES, 7:10 P.M.—7:46 P.M. Tom Cullum, President of the Wayzata Country Club; Wayne Hilbert, CNH Architects; and Branton Schmidt,Builder, were present. Curtis noted golf courses are a permitted use in the RR-1B district through a conditional use permit. The applicant is requesting approvals in order to replace two, outdated and undersized maintenance buildings. The two buildings are located along the western edge of the property closest to the Luce Line Trail. The Wayzata Country Club predates the contemporary regulations regarding golf course uses but over the years has received amendments to the conditional use permit for improvements to the property including building renovations and various modifications to the golf course. The existing storage and maintenance buildings are outmoded and in disrepair. The proposed buildings are necessary and support the golf course day-to-day operations. In addition to the standard accessory Page 7 of 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,August 19,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. building setback requirements,the Code requires all accessory buildings associated with golf course uses to be located at least 50 feet from adjacent residential properties. The applicant is requesting setback variances for proposed accessory buildings,a variance to the limit of oversized accessory buildings, and a variance from the maximum total square footage of accessory buildings in conjunction with an amendment to the existing golf course conditional use permit to construct new accessory buildings. Currently there is a 3,300 square foot cold storage building on the north side of the Luce Line Trail and the applicant is proposing to construct a new 8,000 square foot building for cold storage to be placed in the same general location. The existing north building is approximately 55 feet from the south property line and 115 feet from the residential property to the west. The new north building is proposed to be 30 feet from the Luce Line property line and 115 feet from the west. On the south side of the trail, there are existing buildings/storage container structures which occupy approximately 8,500 square feet. The existing buildings on the south side of the Luce Line both encroach on or over the Luce Line property line. The shop/maintenance building is 26 feet from the adjacent residential property to the west. The new larger south building will be 19 feet from the Luce Line property line and 10 feet from the west. However,the new building will be 70 feet from the nearest residence. The building is proposed to be situated in the grade of the hill to further screen the mass of the building. The building and yard spaces were designed to screen operating noise from the residence The golf course has been working closely with the neighbors and included in the packet are supporting letters from those neighbors. Staff supports the request for the new buildings and believes the buildings are appropriately sized for the site. Gettman asked if the DNR has provided any input into the application. Curtis stated the DNR was notified of the request and that perhaps the applicant can speak to that. Tom Cullum, President of the Wayzata Country Club, stated they have people here to answer any questions. Wayne Hilbert, CNH Architects, stated the functions of the proposed new buildings are current uses on the site. Parts of the site will be cleaned up and stored indoors. A lot of the shipping containers are also proposed to be removed. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 7:17 p.m. Greg Nafstad,460 Old Long Lake Road, stated his father recently passed away and his house is located next to the country club. Nafstad asked if the building meets the setback requirement. Curtis indicated the applicant is requesting a variance as the building would be located 10 feet from the property line and 70 feet from the residence. The setback requirement is 50 feet. The current structure is 26 feet from the property line. Ressler stated it would be 15 feet closer to the property line and 40 feet from the Luce Line. Page 8 of 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,August 19,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Hilbert noted there is an outlot that surrounds the residential area. The building is 10 feet off of the outlot property line on the west side. Nafstad asked if it part of the association. Hilbert indicated it is and that it will be located 70 feet from the edge of the property to the building. Curtis displayed an aerial photograph of the area and pointed out the current structure and the proposed structure. Nafstad stated he is worried about moving it closer to the residential lot and asked whether it can be moved further away. Hilbert stated it is a tricky site because of the fairway and that they attempted to set the building no further than the existing building but that they need enough room between the Luce Line and the building. The plan is to use the building as a buffer between the activity in that area and the residence. Nafstad asked whether it will be within the setback. Curtis stated it will not be conforming and they are requesting to be 10 feet from the outlot where 50 feet is required. The setback from the property line to the building will be 70 feet. McCutcheon asked if they are basically just covering the parking lot. Hilbert indicated they are. Nafstad asked if it can be moved closer to the fairway. Hilbert stated they did look at a number of different options, and when they met with the neighborhood group,there was a concern about moving the activities closer to the neighbors and that they preferred the building as a buffer. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 7:25 p.m. Gettman stated the replacement of the hardcover seems thoughtful and the applicant is trying to get some stuff indoors rather than outside. Gettman indicated he does not have any questions except for a reservation pending comments from the DNR. Ressler asked if Staff has any sort of elevation views of the proposed view. Curtis stated they do not have an overlay of the proposed building over the existing building. Branton Schmidt, Builder, stated the new building will be a concealed fastener with metal panels. The building will blend in with the surrounding foliage. Ressler asked what the height is. Page 9 of 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,August 19,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Schmidt indicated on the low side it would be 15 feet and there is a small section that faces the house that would be seven feet higher than the door. Ressler asked what the height of the existing structure is. Hilbert indicated it is approximately 14 feet to the peak of the structure. The height of the proposed building was set by the garage doors. Erickson noted he did tour the property and that he initially was not sure how a 10-foot setback could be justified given the size of the property. After observing the old buildings,it is apparent they need to be replaced. One of the buildings currently encroaches on the Luce Line so it needs to be moved south. The reason they are moving it 60 feet to the west makes it possible to have all the parking area on the east. In addition,the building helps to separate the neighbors from the parking and the activity that goes on. The applicant has also held a number of meetings with the neighbors and they are in support of the project. Based on that visit, it is felt they have chosen the best spot possible. Libby stated as he toured the property, it was apparent the buildings were beyond their serviceable life and that in his view an inordinate amount of due diligence was done and great effort was taken to communicate with the neighbors and make it as unobtrusive as possible for the neighbors. Libby indicated he would be in favor of the variances. McCutcheon asked why the building cannot move east. Curtis stated the parking and activity would then need to go on the west side. Hilbert stated the issue with placement of the building became the clearance around the fairway and having as much of the parking as possible on the west side. The site also pinches down on the south side and then there is the fairway setback, which makes it a narrow spot. Hilbert stated they felt this was the best spot. McCutcheon stated he does not see a practical difficulty and that they could move it to the east. McCutcheon noted they have a grandfathered building and parking lot,which does help. Hilbert stated they are really swapping the pavement for the building and moving the activities further away from the neighbors. Libby asked if there was any input from the DNR. Rob Olson, Civil Engineer,stated at this time the main point from the DNR was to get the building off of the Luce Line property and that they are not proposing to change or alter the approved crossing. Olson stated the only approvals they anticipate are for some minor stormwater utility crossings. Cullum noted they did sign a 10-year lease for the crossing. Gettman commented with the building shifting south,there appears there will be an ability with that driveway to go perpendicular. Page 10 of 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,August 19,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Olson pointed out the new driveway and the property line. Everything that is being done is being done within the subject property. Gettman stated that will be an easier path for people to go south to east. Hilbert stated the road to the right is the path to the clubhouse. Ressler stated on his first look at the application, he did not see the need for the 10-foot variance and that he was surprised the homeowners' association was in support of it. Following a closer review and a visit to the site, it is understandable why they are proposing that location. When you look at hardcover, a lot of times it is pictured as just driveway, but the building will help take the noise away from some of the equipment and improve the traffic flow. The building will simply house the equipment and they have to move it closer anyway because the DNR will not allow it to be rebuilt in its current location. Ressler stated normally he would not swap hardcover for structure, but in this case the utility of the site is what is telling. The applicant is trying to protect the lakeshore and will be preserving screening. Ressler noted he does not see a better place for the building, and that if it is relocated, something else would need to be sacrificed. Ressler indicated he is in support of the application. Erickson moved to recommend approval of Application No. LA19-000057,Wayzata Country Club, 430 Old Long Lake Road,per Staff's recommendation, Gettman asked whether the motion could be made contingent upon hearing from the DNR. Curtis stated Staff can provide another notice to the DNR and that they usually are prompt to address issues on their land. Ressler stated no response can be interpreted as them not opposing it and that he does not feel it would be fair to withdraw the approval based upon some unknown comment of the DNR. Ressler noted the City Council can make that determination if they deem it appropriate. Libby seconded the motion. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 1,McCutcheon Opposed. 6. LA19-000058 WEST BAY HOMES, 1080 HERITAGE LANE, INTERIM USE PERMIT, 7:46 P.M.—8:16 P.M. (Commissioner Libby recused himself from the application.) Rick Vogelsang, West Bay Homes,was present Oakden stated a new home is being designed for the site and will involve the export of approximately 5,500 cubic yards of material from the site to accommodate the proposed home foundation and lot excavations due to the substantial slope of the vacant lot. As a result, an interim use permit is required. The applicant is proposing to haul the material down Heritage and County Road 15 out of Orono city limits. No public comments have been received. Page 11 of 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,August 19,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Planning Staff recommends approval of the IUP in accordance with the City Engineer's requirements associated with the overall building permit. Staff recommends the applicant provide photo documentation of the condition of the City's roads on the route prior to hauling. Repair to any damaged roadway will be the responsibility of the contractor. Rick Vogelsang, West Bay Homes, stated he has spoken with the neighbors and one of the biggest concerns expressed was the school bus times. Vogelsang indicated he is in complete agreement not to start any truck movement prior to 9 a.m.,which also helps to alleviate concerns with rush hour traffic. Currently they have two site options to take the fill to and that will depend on the excavator's decision. All the black topsoil will remain on the property. Ressler asked what the route will be. Vogelsang indicated they will take a left on County Road 15. Erickson noted Staff is recommending the permit be approved in accordance with the City Engineer's requirements as part of the building permit. In addition, Staff recommends the applicant provide photo documentation of the condition of the city roads. Erickson asked if the applicant is aware of that. Vogelsang stated he is fine with that but there is also a lot of other construction in the area. A street sweeper will be on the property that will clean up any mess from this project as well as other projects. Vogelsang stated to his knowledge the first project is nearing completion. Ressler asked if he is aware of the weight restrictions for Tanager Bridge. Vogelsang indicated he is. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 7:52 p.m. Dennis Libby, 1000 Heritage Lane, stated in 2003,just prior to him moving into his residence,this area had one of those unfortunate 100-year rain events. As a result, his heating system was flooded almost to the carpet level in the house. In order to abate that, he approached the City and they recommended a design engineer be hired to redesign the grading and do abatement. After incurring$65,000 in expenses, the heating system has never flooded again. Libby stated he does not object to the volume of material being removed, but that he has a concern with bringing the adjacent lot almost down to a street grade level,which will cause a very dramatic change in drainage from the existing bluff. The other property owner on the other side has some of the same concerns. Libby stated while none of his neighbors are here tonight, he does want to, in concert with those neighbors, state that their neighborhood has seen some fairly dramatic deterioration of the street which the City of Orono has had to remedy. Finally,there needs to be a very careful review by the City Engineer of the drainage and grading plans and that he would recommend that be a condition of approval. Ressler asked whether the City Engineer gets to weigh in with his concerns prior to the application going before the City Council. Page 12 of 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,August 19,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Oakden indicated the City Engineer reviews the building permits as they are submitted and he reviews them for grading and managing water on the property. The application was sent to the City Engineer prior to tonight's meeting and he indicated he would do a more thorough review at the time of building permit since this application pertained more to hauling of material. Ressler asked whether the City Engineer could be requested to take a look at the drainage before it goes to the City Council. Barnhart stated he can do that,but the reason why he does not spend a lot of time reviewing the drainage at this point is that the drainage plans often change, which is why that detailed review is done at the building permit stage. Vogelsang stated the City Engineer did have comments during his preliminary review to be careful of the drainage. The drainage is challenging on the site and that they will be doing some custom drainage to handle that. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 7:57 p.m. Gettman stated given the circumstances,the Planning Commission could recommend that the City Engineer review the drainage prior to the City Council meeting. Oakden stated the City Engineer is working on preliminary review and has had some communication with the applicant. That information can be included. Erickson stated aside from this particular project but in the ordinary day-to-day of living on Heritage Lane,as it relates to maintenance of that street, such as snow plowing, is that maintained by the City or the homeowners' association. Barnhart stated to his knowledge it is a city street. Libby stated Heritage Lane to the cul-de-sac is maintained by the City up to the point where there is a right-of-way to access Tanager Estates. The second cul-de-sac has not yet been maintained by the City and that he is not sure whether it has been incorporated yet. Libby noted there are thousands of tons of snow on an annual basis that has been moved and stored by the City in front of where this property is, which the City will need to look at. Barnhart stated the second cul-de-sac was built as a public cul-de-sac and that he is not sure whether the City has accepted that as a public improvement. Libby stated the previous council approved Tanager Estates and they required that they be responsible for rebuilding of damage to the infrastructure of Heritage Lane. That condition is already in place but he has not seen that developer do any maintenance or repairs to that street. The City has repaired that street, and that he is hoping this developer will keep their word to keep the streets clean and maintain them. Ressler stated he would support that condition as part of a motion. Page 13 of 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,August 19,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Erickson suggested the language say that the engineering staff inspect Heritage Road before and after the project and be prepared to report on any change in condition of that particular road. Ressler asked if that is an ordinary request. Barnhart stated typically the Public Works staff videotapes the street prior to the hauling commencing. Ressler asked if they are going above and beyond the normal requirement. Barnhart stated it is helpful if the applicant understands the condition of the road prior to commencement of the project and that the City will document it as well. Vogelsang noted there is construction going on outside of Heritage and that he is not sure how the City will manage that other construction in the immediate vicinity of Tanager Estates. Vogelsang stated he is totally okay with the City Engineer inspecting the condition of the road but that he does not want to be responsible for all that other activity and that he is not sure how that is regulated. Ressler stated prior to any dirt being hauled,the condition of the road will be documented. Barnhart stated it will be a challenge given the number of projects but that they will look at the site carefully. Most of the damage in this situation would likely be the curbing but that he will need to consult with the Public Works staff on how to best document that. McCutcheon stated they will have to rely on City Staff, City Engineer, and inspectors to note anything that is unusual. Ressler concurred it will be difficult to figure out who impacts what but that he is not sure of another way to do it. It is a public road and gets a lot of use.Any damage that is done from the point of starting to the end will need to be documented and hopefully there will not be too much of a discrepancy. Barnhart stated it is not uncommon for an adjoining neighbor to have concerns about the drainage, but that the City Engineer does not do a detailed review of the grading at this stage because it often changes prior to building permit being issued. The Planning Commission is well within their bounds to require that review and Staff will provide the comments of the City Engineer to the Council but not at the stage where a grading plan can be approved. McCutcheon moved, Gettman seconded,to recommend approval of Application No. LA19-000058, West Bay Homes, 1080 Heritage Lane,granting of an interim use permit,subject to Staff's recommendations as outlined in Staff's report. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 0,Libby Abstained. 7. LA19-000053 CITY OF ORONO,TEXT AMENDMENT,AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK REGULATIONS,8:16 P.M.— 8:57 P.M. Barnhart noted this item was discussed at the July Planning Commission meeting and was reviewed by the City Council at a work session. Three options were drafted by Staff to address this issue. Page 14 of 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,August 19,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Option 1 is based on the sight line and reads that the average lakeshore setback shall be a line drawn connecting the most adjacent lake side corners of the principal structures on the immediately adjacent lakeshore lots. In situations where improvement is proposed on a lot adjacent to a vacant lot or right-of- way,the average lakeshore setback shall be equivalent to the setback of the most lakeward protrusion of the residence building on the immediately adjacent improved lakeshore lot. For lots with lakeshore on two opposing sides,the average lakeshore shall only apply to the side opposite the street. Option 2 is based on the true average, and reads as follows: No principal or accessory building shall be located closer to the lakeshore than the average lakeshore setback,a setback distance established by the average of the distance between the most lakeward protrusion of the principal structures and the OHWL on the two immediately adjacent improved residential lakeshore lots. This averaged distance shall be measured from the lakeshore. In situations where improvement is proposed on a lot adjacent to a vacant lot or right-of-way,the average lakeshore setback shall be equivalent to the setback of the most lakeward protrusion of the residence building on the immediately adjacent improved lakeshore lot. Option 3 has an exception with a second line, and is as follows: No principal or accessory building shall be located closer to the lakeshore than the average distance from the shoreline of existing residence buildings on adjacent lots; except that this does not apply to patios and other accessory structures less than 42 inches above existing grade, stairways, lifts, landings, lockboxes, flagpoles and pump houses. Further,the average lakeshore setback shall apply only to classified lakes and shall not apply to tributaries. The average lakeshore setback line shall be a straight line connecting the most lakeward protrusions of the residence buildings on the immediately adjacent lakeshore lots. Staff supports Option 1. Gettman asked if there is any benefit to establishing a minimum number. Barnhart stated the only city he is aware of having just a number was Victoria and they had incorporated a 100-or 150-foot setback to the lake. Most of the cities used something similar to Option 1 and that in his view there is no real benefit to doing an additional minimum beyond the 75-foot setback. There was some discussion at the Staff level about adding a maximum number. The proposed changes do not address the flag lot situations and the City Council recognized that those will likely require variances. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 8:32 p.m. There were no public comments relating to this application. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 8:32 p.m. Libby stated each of the options have static elements that do not quite make the cut and that a solution is perplexing at this stage. Libby commented at this point he does not feel like he can comment from an approval standpoint. The ideas are there, but perhaps continuing the conversation would be in order. Page 15 of 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,August 19,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Barnhart stated he would recommend each Commissioner take 10 to 15 sites at random and apply the regulation based on Options 1, 2, or 3, and try to apply the average lakeshore setback to each one to test each of the options. Gettman asked if this will be discussed at a work session. Barnhart stated a work session is not scheduled at this point and that he does not anticipate one in the near future. Barnhart stated he would like the Planning Commissioners to test it themselves because they will have to apply it on real life examples. Libby commented he would like to play with it a little bit before making a recommendation on it. Erickson stated he appreciates the efforts of Staff and that in his view Option 1 is the best option out of the three. Erickson stated he also appreciates that it does solve some of the problems that have been encountered, but on the other hand, he wishes there was a way to make it better. The ordinance really only works well if there is a relatively straight piece of lakeshore, which is not often the case, but that in his view approving it is better than not going with anything. In addition,the goal of a straight line would be to provide 180 degrees of view,which is probably not a reasonable goal. The end result will be that the City will have probably as many variances as they do currently,but it does clarify some issues and it is better than what currently exists. Barnhart noted 3026 Casco point is one example where the City Council did not suggest preserving a 180-degree view. Libby asked whether it would be sensible to reach out to someone who has a degree in geometry to assist the City. Barnhart stated what he is trying to avoid is needing an advanced degree to understand the City's code. Staff is attempting to make it understandable to the common person, and if a mathematician is required, Staff has not done a good job. Barnhart stated in his view there is a solution somewhere in the three options provided and that he would like the Planning Commission to test it. McCutcheon stated the fairest way to do it is from the 75-foot setback. If the lake was empty from day one,that would be the way to do it,but as long as there are existing houses, it is a hard problem to solve. McCutcheon stated he does not believe there will be a solution that everyone will be on board with. Barnhart commented it solves more problems but does not solve them all. The Planning Commission can also recommend no changes, and that he would suggest tabling it until September, which would allow the Commissioners do some of their own testing. Ressler noted Staff is asking the Planning Commission to weigh in on the various options. One of the most glaring examples is Hunter's Point, where there is a meandering shoreline and you run into situations where it doesn't fit into the box. If the City is looking at finding a solution to that type of situation,having a setback based on structure would be helpful, which would also be discernable to a layman. Page 16 of 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,August 19,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Ressler stated he does not believe there are a lot of properties that are outside of the 75-foot setback and outside of the average lakeshore setback on neighboring properties. As a result, it may be appropriate to take into consideration Option 2 because it is simpler to understand. Ressler recommended some illustrations also be provided in the ordinance to help people understand it. Barnhart stated there is already language in the ordinance about property that is adjacent to an undeveloped lot or right-of-way and that Staff is not proposing changes to that. Gettman asked whether Staff could provide them with some lots that they should look at. Barnhart stated he is looking for the Planning Commission's input and knowledge of unique lots that they are aware of. Ressler stated he is not in favor of tabling it, and unless the Planning Commission feels they will have some additional input into it after tabling it,he would recommending bringing it to the City Council and letting them tighten it up if they feel it is appropriate. Gettman noted three of the commissioners are not comfortable with voting on it and that the extra time would allow them to get more comfortable with it. Ressler stated he is not in favor of eliminating the average lakeshore setback since there will always be situations on Lake Minnetonka that need that type of protection. A 75-foot setback is pretty reasonable, but at the end of the day,there will need to be some sort of an average lakeshore setback. Ressler stated in his view Option 2 would be the closest thing to having a stop gap. Libby indicated he is in agreement with Chair Ressler. McCutcheon stated he even likes the 75-foot setback but that he is not sure of the numbers. McCutcheon commented maybe the Planning Commission should do some more homework. Curtis noted they can use Hennepin County's website. Ressler stated he would like a safe and simple approach that is not going to expose the City to too much controversy,which is why he likes Option 2 because there are still the setback requirements. The Planning Commission can talk about this for months and not allow it to get to the City Council, but inevitably it will be the Council's decision. Ressler stated he does not believe he will have additional input by looking at different lots and that he is not sure tabling will change the outcome. Libby stated tabling is a constructive vehicle for them to come up with more edification and options. Barnhart stated the Planning Commission has three options. They can either table it, approve one of the options, or deny all of them. The Planning Commission may find it helpful to try out each of the options since the Planning Commission will be implementing it on different applications. Barnhart noted there is no pressing time limit on this ordinance. Page 17 of 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,August 19,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Libby moved, Gettman seconded,to recommend approval of Application No. LA19-000053, City of Orono,Text Amendment,Average Lakeshore Setback Regulations. Ressler stated the Planning Commission's options are the sight line,the true average, and the second line, and that he would be in support of one of the three. Barnhart stated Staff's recommendation is Option 1. Erickson stated the Chair's points are well taken regarding Option 2 and that he would be willing to support that with the comment that the Planning Commission has not yet achieved perfection and probably never will. Option 2 gives a measure of flexibility to many of the people who do not have shoreline that is a straight line, and of the three options,the best option is Option 2. Erickson indicated he would prefer to go ahead with that option rather than tabling. Libby stated he would withdraw his motion and replace it with adoption of Option 2. Gettman stated he is not in favor of withdrawing the motion to table and that he would like to have a vote on the motion. VOTE ON MOTION TO TABLE: Ayes 2,Nays 3,McCutcheon,Ressler, and Erickson Opposed. MOTION FAILED. Libby moved,Erickson seconded,Application No. LA19-000053, City of Orono Text Amendment, Average Lake Setback,to recommend adoption of Option No.2. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 1, Gettman Opposed. 9. UPDATE ON AUGUST 12,2019,CITY COUNCIL MEETING Barnhart reported on the following actions taken by the City Council: • Approved an amendment to the development agreement for 1400 Bracketts Point Road • The resolution and variance for 2710 Pence Lane was approved • The variance at 1905 Concordia was approved on consent • The application by Scott Gates for Deering island was tabled pending some questions by the City Council in terms of activities on the lot. • The average lakeshore setback variance for 2967 Casco was approved. In that application the City Council looked closely at the house two doors down to establish the average lakeshore setback. Ressler asked what the additional feedback the City Council requested for Deering Island was. Barnhart indicated that was independent of any land use application. A party was held on the island and the City Council wanted to understand those issues and give the property owner an opportunity to address any questions. They do not expect the Planning Commission or Staff to dig into that type of detail. Page 18 of 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,August 19,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Barnhart thanked the Planning Commissioners for attending the groundbreaking ceremony for the senior housing project. The builder and owner really appreciated their presence. The center is expected to open next summer. ADJOURNMENT Erickson moved, Libby seconded,to adjourn the Orono Planning Commission meeting at 9:07 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0. ATTEST: ft, Jon Ressler, Chair Page 19 of 19