HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-17-1990 Planning MinutesMINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
HELD SEPTEMBER 17, 1990
ATTENDANCE 7:00 P.M. •
The Orono Planning Com.Tiissioa met on the above date with the
following members present: Planning Commission Chair Charlie
Kelley, Vice Chair Maureen Bellows, and Planning Commission
Members Jeffrey Johnson, Ed Cohen, Jim Hanson, Candace Rowlette
and Sara Moos. The following represented the City Staff:
Building and Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Planning and
Zoning Administrator Gaffron, and City Recorder Scheffler.
Council Representative Callahan \/as present.
Bellows called the meeting to order. She stated that
Chairman Kelley had a schedule conflict, but that he would be
present later this evening.
Bellows also noted that a group of Orono citizens had
scheduled a meeting to discuss the proposed Highway 12 corridor
expansion. She stated that the meeting will be held at the
Cosgroves on Fox Ridge Road on Wednesday, September 19, at 7:30
p.m. She said, “This group is meeting to voice their objections
to the Luce Line Trail or Watertown Road being considered as
alternate routes for the corridor."
11334 REBERS CONSTRUCTION SUGARWOODS PLAT
RECONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONS OF PRD APPROVAL
REFERRED BACK TO PLANNING COMMISSION BY COUNCIL
Mr. Sid Rebers and Mr. Robert Kost, a representative
Rebers Construction, were present.
for
Kelley said, "My position on this request is that the house
pad and driveway should meet the requirements established and
approved with the original PRD. I know that there are a few lots
that may need to deviate from that because of the elevation of
the properties. The question is whether or not it is necessary
for the Planning Commission to review each application. I think
I have made my position very clear in that respect."
Cohen said, "I too have always been in favor of supervision
because a PRD is not subject to broad form exceptions. The plan
was developed and accepted for the overall benefit of the
Community. The Planning Commission spent a great deal of time on
this and I believe each application should be reviewed. I
believe the Planning Commission would be abdicating its
responsibilities if we did not require that."
Bellows concurred with Kelley. She said, "It seemed very
clear to me that the 50' setback area was for one driyeway 20
feet in width. There was nothing in that recommendation that
implied that the garage could be placed right at the 50' setback
line, thus requiring the backout/turn-around to be within the
setback area. I believe that requests to do so should absolutely
be dealt with on an individual basis."
- 1 -
■ I li I i»n
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990
ZONING FILE #1334~REBERS CONTINUED
Cohen asked whether there
disappearing.
is a problem with trees
Kelley stated that there is no such problem that he has
viewed. He said, "I believe the developer is doing everything
possible to enhance the development and preserve the trees."
Bellows added, "There were comments made in that respect
because at one point it was stated that all trees that are to be
preserved are to be marked. What has proven to be more feasible
is that the developer is making that assessment without marking
the trees. Many mature trees have been moved into protected
areas."
Johnson stated that in his opinion it is not necessary for
each application to be reviewed individually. He said, "We did
spend a great deal of time on this. However, the Planning
Commission needs to be somewhat flexible and I would prefer not
to see each application come back. I think that the amendment
prepared by staff should be sufficient to address the
applications."
Mr. Host said, "We assumed that, as with any other setback,
that we could place the garage at the setback line and provide
sufficient access. The protective covenants for Sugarwoods
included a requirement for three-car garages. The three options
provided by staff as part of the amendment would still require
the property owner to meet certain standards in relation to
terrain, and tree preservation, before approval is given for an
approach apron to be in the front yard setback. Any
configuration other than what staff has provided would need
Planning Commission approval. We view the amendment as a
suitable compromise."
It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Bellows, to recommend
that matters involving changes or variances be referred back to
the Planning Commission for their review. Johnson asked whether
those in favor of individual review oppose the amendment
presented by staff. Kelley stated that he preferred not to
impose the responsibility on staff. Cohen reiterated that he did
not wish to abdicate his responsibilities. Mabusth stated that
the proposal prepared by staff resulted from input received from
the applicant and City staff. Kelley said, "It is important to
note that the 50' setback is a different definition than that
typically in our Code." Motion, Ayes-6, Johnson, Nay. Motion
carried.
- 2 -
J
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990
#1585 C. ARNOLD CARLSON
855 FOREST ARMS LANE
AFTER-THE-FACT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
PUBLIC HEARING 7:02 P.M. TO 7:08 P.M.
The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were
duly noted.
Mrs. Carlson was present for this Public Hearing.
Mabusth reviewed the major issues involved with this
application. She stated that the City has no records relating to
the date the seawall was constructed (se? Jeanne Mabusth's memo
dated September 12, 1990).
Bellows asked whether the Carlsons have obtained all other
necessary permits from the various agencies involved with this
application.
Mabusth replied, "Yes, all of the appropriate agencies have
granted permits."
Bellows asked Mrs. Carlson why they had not applied for a
permit prior to constructing the seawall.
Mrs. Carlson replied, "The only purpose of the wall is to
keep the ground from washing into the channel. We put the dock
on top of the wall rather than using the support posts. The wall
is part of the dock, for which we did have a permit. We didn't
realize that we needed a permit."
Bellows asked Mrs. Carlson whether a contractor had done the
work.
Mrs. Carlson replied, "We did the work ourselves."
There were no comments from the public relative to this
application and the Public Hearing was closed.
Johnson asked whether the wall structure was new or if it
replaced an existing structure.
Mabusth replied, "The retaining wall is new."
Cohen asked when the dock permit was obtained.
Mrs. Carlson replied, "The house was constructed in 1979 and
the dock permit was approved shortly after that."
Bellows asked whether the wall was constructed at the same
time the dock was installed.
Mrs. Carlson replied, "The soil kept washing away. We felt
- 3 -
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990
ZONING FILE 11585-CARLSON CONTINUED
that unless something was done to stop it, we would not be able
to access the dock. We constructed the wall in the 1988."
Bellows said, "There is an obvious need for the wall."
Hanson concurred with Bellows.
It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Cohen, co recommend
approval of the after-the-fact Conditional Use Permit for a
wooden seawall, with the condition that the appropriate fines for
the after-the-fact nature of this application are paid. Hanson
noted that there is minimal aesthetic impact of the lakeshore
from this structure. Bellows added that the structure is serving
a purpose. Motion, Ayes-6, Nays-0. Motion carried.
fl586 JAMES S. BURANEN
1085 BROWN ROAD SOUTH
AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE
PUBLIC HEARING 7:09 P.M. TO 7:13 P.M.
The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were
duly noted.
Mr. Buranen was present.
Mabusth summarized the pertinent facts relating to this
application. She asked Mr. Buranen how long he has resided in
Orono.
Mr. Buranen replied, "I have lived here two months."
Mabusth stated that Mr. Buranen ceased work immediately
after being notified of the need for a permit. She said, "The
applicant applied for a building permit and provided us with a
survey of the property. During the reviev; of the application,
staff determined that a variance is required. There are several
lot lines depicted on the survey. By the time a formal
resolution is drafted, the City Attorney will have provided
direction as to which line is relative in this case."
Bellows stated that she is concerned about the safety aspect
of Mr. Buranen backing the limousines out of the driveway. She
said, "There appears to be no turn around space. I believe that
if we approve a location to house these vehicles, we should also
require that a turn-around be provided."
Mr. Buranen said. "I have removed a considerable amount of
brush from the area at the end of the driveway to improve
visibility."
Bellows asked, "How do you feel about a requirement to
provide a turn-around?"
- 4 -
i
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990
ZONING FILE #1586-BURANEN CONTINUED
Mr. Buranen replied, "I don't feel it is necessary. If I
need to back out during a busy time of day, I back up into the
yard and position the car so I can pull straight ahead. In the
evening hours I have never had any problems."
Thera were no public comments regarding this application and
the Pubi. : Hearing was closed.
Cohen stated that as long as the applicant has indicated
that he has no problem, he sees no need for a turn-around. He
said, "It appears that Mr. Buranen recognizes the potential
problems and has gone so far as to remove the brush from the end
of the driveway."
Hanson concurred with Cohen. He said, "Mr. Buranen has the
expertise to handle this type of vehicle. I don't believe a turn
around is needed."
Bellows asked Mabusth whether City staff has reviewed the
safety aspect of this.
Mabusth replied, "No."
Bellows suggested that the Public Works Director be asked to
look at the site prior to Council's review of this application.
It v/as moved by Cohen, seconded by Bellows, to recommend
approval of after-the-fact side yard setback Variance for an
addition to a principal structure, subject to staff
recommendations and the inspection of the driveway by City staff
to determine the safety status of this condition. Motion,
Ayes-6. Nays-0. Motion carried.
#1587 RUBY L. SIFORD
96 HACKBERRY HILL
AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE
PUBLIC HEARING 7:17 P.M. TO 7:25 P.M.
The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were
duly noted.
Mrs. Siford and her son, Bill Siford. were present.
Mabusth suggested that Mrs. Siford be given an opportunity
to explain how this situation arose.
Bill Siford said, "V/e were under the impression that our
contractor had applied for the permits. We later learned that
was not the case. The contractor claimed that the City inspector
had stopped by and told him the deck had to be five feet from the
garage. That is how he constructed the deck. I talked with the
Building Inspector today. He stated that he did not tell our
- 5 -
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990
ZONING FILE #1587-SIFORD CONTINUED
contractor that a five foot separation was acceptable,
tell the contractor to stop working on the deck."
He did
Cohen asked Mr. Siford v/hether the contractor was present
this evening.
Mr. Siford replied, "Apparently he is away working on a
project in Wisconsin and I can't get in touch with him."
Mabusth reviewed the chronology of the events involved in
this application (see Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated September 12,
1990).
Mr. Siford added, "Once we found out that our contractor had
not pulled the appropriate permits. I went to the City and made
sure we had the necessary permits."
Mrs. Siford said, "The contractor told us that we needed to
cut 16" off of the side of the deck facing the garage. He also
made an adjustment to the steps."
Mr. Siford added, "V/e do have the signatures from the
neighbors. They are happy that we are trying to improve the
property."
Bellows asked whether it would be feasible to connect the
garage and deck.
Mabusth replied, "I did talk to the Building Inspectors in
that regard. I went out to the site to see if that would be
possible. Based on the elevations of the property, it would not
work."
Bellows stated that she was also concerned about the storage
shed located between the garage and the house.
Mrs. Siford stated that the shed has been in that location
since 1979.
Bellows asked Mabusth whether the Building Inspector has
recommended any solution to this existing condition.
Mabusth replied, "Vie have only discussed what is required by
the Building Code if the Planning Commission recommended approval
of the five foot separation."
Johnson asked if it is not the intent of the Building Code
to require the ten foot separation for fire safety.
Mabusth replied, "That is correct."
- 6 -
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990
ZONING FILE #1587-SIFORD CONTINUED
Johnson stated that due to the open nature of the structure
that it should not pose a fire problem.
Bellows asked Mrs. Siford if the area belov/ the deck will
remain open.
Mrs. Siford replied, "It will remain open for now, but may
screen it in later. We do have birds that build their nests
under there."
Johnson asked for the name of the contractor that had been
hired by Mrs. Siford.
Mr. Siford replied, "His name is John Aulwes, Designer
Concepts."
There were no public comments regarding this application and
the Public Hearing was closed.
Bellows said, "I would be inclined at this point to allow
them to construct a fire wall. Because of the proximity of the
storage shed to the garage, I would like fire walls on the back
and the sides. Actually the entire garage, including the roof,
should be fire insulated."
Johnson suggested that the Planning Commission's
recommendation be based on the Building Inspector's approval of
the project in relation to the Fire and Building Codes."
It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Johnson, to recommend
approval of the 5' separation between a principal and accessory
structure. The recommendation is contingent on the proper fines
being paid for the after-the-fact nature of this application, and
inspections by the City to insure that all fire codes are met and
enforced. Staff shall take into consideration the storage shed
as well as the deck. Motion, Ayes-6 Nays-0. Motion carried.
(Chairman Kelley arrived at this point in the meeting)
#1588 U.S. WEST NEW VECTOR GROUP, INC.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
PUBLIC HEARING 7:30 P.M. TO 8:10 P.M.
The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were
duly noted.
Mr. John Uban, Consultant, Mr. Ed Hasek, Consultant, and Mr.
Dave Hellerman, U.S. West Engineer, were present.
Mabusth stated that her memo raises certain zoning issues
involved with this application (see Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated
September 13, 1990). She said, "Staff feels that our Code may
not specifically address this type of application." Mabusth
- 7 -
r
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990
ZONING FILE #1588-U.S. WEST NEW VECTOR CONTINUED
suggested that the applicants be permitted to make their
presentation. She noted that a public information meeting had
been held by the applicants on Friday, September 14th, and that
only two persons from the public attended."
Mr. Uban explained how cellular phones function. He said,
"It is a low wattage system. Towers are placed in locations so
they fit together in cell system, much like a honeycomb. Each
time we look for a new antenna location, we look at a small area.
We have selected a site behind the Vineyard of the Lake Church.
(Mr. Uban shov/ed an aerial view of the search area and the
particular site chosen. ) The site we have selected is in the
center of the search area. The tower will be 150' tall. A small
building with the computers will be located at the bottom of the
tower. There is a small air conditioner in the building. The
tower is self-supporting, there are no guide wires. These towers
do not fall down like trees. They are constructed to withstand
150 mph winds and sleet storms. However, should one ever falls
down, it is designed to break at midpoint and fold. The tower is
located with sufficient setback so it will pose no safety hazard
for any surrounding property. The transmissions are low wattage.
They do not cause any biological interference. The standard
microwave or television emits more radiation than this tower
will. There has been no documentation of these towers creating
interference with other transmissions. The tower uses a
frequency that is at the upper end of the UKF frequency. This
frequency is above radio and television and is used by all
cellular phone systems. It is our opinion that this structure
meets all pertinent criteria for public health, safety and
welfare. The structure will be well screened from adjacent
neighbors. It will be visible above the trees. The tower makes
no noise and is not lighted. Approximately once a week, a pickup
truck would be on the site to maintain the tower. Except for the
fact that the structure can be seen above the trees, it has no
other impact on the area. We considered other locations and
believed this is the best location."
Kelley asked whether this area is currently served by U.S.
VJest Vector.
Mr. Uban replied, "Generally. This tower is being put in
place to meet one capacity. There are too many users in this
area now. If too many are trying to use the same frequency,
communication is lost."
Kelley asked where the tower is that presently serves the
Cellular phone users in this area.
Mr. Hellerman -eplied, "There are several. Part of the
problem is that Wayzata is located in a bowl. There is a
facility in Hamel, Shorewood and Golden Valley. Those towers are
- 8 -
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990
ZONING FILE #1588-U.S. WEST NEW VECTOR CONTINUED
not close enough to get a signal down into the City of Wayzata.”
Kelley asked if the basic intent of this proposal is to
provide service primarily for the City of VJayzata.
Mr. Hellerman replied, "We are trying to serve an area that
has a two to three mile radius from that area."
Kelley asked what other sites had been considered.
Mr. Uban stated that it is difficult to locate a site
because they cannot condemn property. He said, "We have
considered the Country Club, but they had no suitable site. VJe
looked at the Busy Beaver Daycare Center, however the slopes to
the rear of the facility were too steep. V/e wanted to have the
tower located close to Highway 12, but away from residential
density."
Kelley asked whether
played a greater role Jn
located.
location or economic considerations
determining where a tower is to be
Mr. Uban replied, "Both of those factors must be considered.
We must provide good service at a reasonable rate. There are
currently two companies competing with one another."
Kelley asked whether the two companies could share the same
tower.
Mr. Uban replied, "No, they do not share towers."
Kelley was concerned about the other company requesting a
location within Orono for a tower.
Mr. Uban stated that the Cellular phone is a public service
and is useful in the event of emergencies when regular phone
lines are out of service.
Mabusth asked where U.S. West's competitor has their nearest
tower.
Mr. Hellerman replied, "Our competitor has a facility on the
water tower in Wayzata."
Kelley asked whether the use of Orono's water tower had been
given consideration.
Mr. Uban replied, "I don't believe the water tower is
located in the search area."
Bellows asked how critical this specific search is to
- 9 -
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990
ZONING FILE #1588-U.S. WEST NEW VECTOR CONTINUED
providing service.
Mr. Uban explained that it is important to locate the
facility in as close to the center of the search area as possible
in order to have a functional cell.
Bellov;s asked how large a typical cell is.
Mr. Hellerman explained, "When the system was first
introduced to the Minneapolis area, the first 12 to 15 cells, we
had to use tall towers. As the system developed, and the number
of cells increased, the tower size was reduced.”
Bellov/s asked what the height of the tall towers is.
Mr. Hellerman said, "The tallest tower we have, located in
Cologne, is approximately 430*. In the Downtown Minneapolis
area, the towers are now 60' to 80' tall."
Bellows asked if the only chance for the size of the
proposed tower to be reduced would be if additional towers were
installed in the area.
Mr. Hellerman replied, "I would expect over the long term
that to happen. How long into the future that may be, I cannot
say."
Johnson noted that there are several Ham operation towers
located within the City of Orono.
Rowlette asked how tali the tower will be in relation to the
existing power lines on the proposed site.
Mr. Hasek replied, "The power lines are 70' to 75' high.
The tower would be approximately twice as high."
Mr. Darrell Anderson, 920 I7est Wayzata Boulevard, said, "I
believe this is totally incompatible with the area in which it is
proposed. All of the property to the north of the Luce Line
Trail and Highway 5 is residential property. I believe it is
unsuitable for the church site and is not in keeping with long
term plans for the Luce Line Trail. In terms of alternative
sites, there is undeveloped land across Wayzata Boulevard between
the Wayzata by-pass, where the Gun Club and Driving Range are
located. That area would be more suitable in my opinion."
Mr. Anand Gopinath, 705 Old Long Lake Road, said, "I wrote a
letter to you because I was not sure I could attend this meeting.
Vihen I purchased my house, I was informed that the area was zoned
residential, two acre minimum. A variance has been given to the
church and the daycare facility in order for them to operate in
- 10 -
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990
ZONING FILE #1588-U.S. WEST NEW VECTOR CONTINUED
their present locations. Now the City is being asked to approve
a request for a commercial, industrial use in this same area.
That is not in keeping with the rural character of the area and I
oppose it. I have talked with the U.S. West Engineers. I am
convinced that the radiation levels from the tower are acceptable
for human exposure. However, I believe that the tower ought to
be located in an industrial or commercial area. I believe that
locating it in a residential area will reduce property values.
The majority of phone transmissions take place with underground
or overhead lines. Cellular phones are only used for mobile
phone traffic. They may be useful in the event of an emergency,
but are used primarily by business people traveling in
automobiles. The pattern coverage for this area will not be
altered if the tower is located elsewhere."
Ms. Karen Anderson, 920 West Wayzata Boulevard, asked if it
is a common practice to combine a tax free property such as a
church with a commercial use. She also asked if there is
sufficient dry buildable land for the tower.
Kelley replied, "I don't believe we have combined uses in
the manner before."
Mr. Hasek stated that he was not aware of the need to
provide information regarding the dry buildable area.
Mabusth stated that such information was not requested.
Kelley asked why it would not be possible to put a 60* tower
in Wayzata as opposed to installing a 150' tower three miles
away.
Mr. Hellerman replied, "That would not efficiently cover the
area we must serve."
Mr. Uban said, "We are here asking to install a public
service structure. It is the height in excess of 65' that
creates the need for the Conditional Use Permit."
Kelley said, "I disagree that this is a public service
structure. Cellular phones are only used by a small number of
people who can afford them. I think there is a defined
difference between utilities, such as electricity and gas, and
Cellular phones."
Mr. Uban replied, "Your ordinances address communications."
Kelley said, "I know that is what the Ordinances state. It
may be necessary to update the Ordinances to take into
consideration such new technologies."
- 11 -
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990
ZONING FILE #1588-U.S. WEST NEW VECTOR CONTINUED
Bellows added, "This is a conunercial operation. It is not
public service orientated. I am also concerned with the fact
that the tower will be visible. People who live in Orono
appreciate the rural character. If you were proposing to combine
the tower with an existing structure, such as a water tower,
there may be less opposition. You are proposing to inject into a
residential neighborhood a very large and visible commercial
structure. That is exactly the type of scenario we try to avoid
in this City."
Mr. Uban replied, "Public service does not mean just gas and
electricity. It involves all types of utilities including
communication. You cannot ignore your Ordinances in that
respect. This is clearly within that definition. When talking
about public services as a business, all utilities charge for
their service. If you do not pay, you do not receive the
service. There is no difference here."
Rowlette said, "There are a lot of people in Orono that have
Cellular phones. We may not be serving 100% of Orono residents,
but we are serving a large number."
Hanson agreed with Rowlette and added, "I believe that
Cellular phones do fall under the category of public service."
Moos said, "I concur with Maureen. This is a commercial use
in a residential area. I believe there are other alternatives."
Johnson agreed with Hanson. He said, "The church and
daycare center are Conditional Uses, as are the Ham radio towers
on private property. I do not see any distinction between those.
I do not believe this will have a large commercial impact on the
area.
Cohen said, "I am having difficulty with the location. I
believe there may be a need for the service, but don't believe it
has to be that tower installed in that location."
Johnson said, "I would be inclined to favor this more than
structures that have been approved for other utilities. Those
structures are generally constructed on substandard lots and do
not meet any requirements. Placing the tower on the church
property may mean that the site will be maintained."
Hanson questioned whether it would be possible to combine
the tower with an existing Ham radio tower in the same
approximate location.
Mr. Hellerman stated that the location of the nearest Ham
radio tower is in the middle of residential housing.
- 12 -
Mm
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990
ZONING FILE #1588-0.8. WEST NEW VECTOR CONTINUED
Mr. Gopinath stated that it is possible for U.S. West to go
back to the drawing board and determine another search area that
would provide the same results.
There were no further comments from the public and the
Public Hearing was closed.
Kelley said, "Before we address the other aspects of this
application, we should consider whether or not the Planning
Commission will approve this Conditional Use."
Mabusth asked the Planning Commission whether they interpret
the code in such a way that permits this use. She said, "If you
consider the Code section relative to accessory uses, this
Conditional Use Permit application for a public service structure
does not fit. I don't believe there is a section of the Code
that addresses this use. If this were to fall within the
guidelines for a public service structure C.U.P., there must be a
50' setback. The standards for a Ham radio structure do not
apply. I'm not sure that our Code at this time allows this
structure in a residential zone. I believe it would be
appropriate to have a legal opinion from the City Attorney."
Kelley asked whether the legal opinion should be rendered
before the Planning Commission makes a recommendation.
Mabusth believed that may be an appropriate was to proceed.
Councilmember Callahan said, "If the Planning Commission
should recommend denial of the C.U.P. then there would be no need
for the City Attorney to render an opinion."
It was moved by
denial of the C.U.P.
within a residential
Nay. Motion carried.
Kelley, seconded by Bellows, to recommend
for a free-standing antenna to be located
zone. Motion, Ayes-5, Johnson, Rowlette,
#1589 MARCUS AND JUDY BLUE
2160 CRYSTAL AVENUE
VARIANCES
PUBLIC HEARING 8:15 P.M. TO 8:19 P.M.
The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were
duly noted.
Mr. and Mrs. Blue were present.
Mabusth provided a brief review of her memo dated September
13, 1990. She added that she has asked Mr. Blue to provide a
drawing of the elevations.
Mr. Blue showed the Planning Commission his sketch of the
- 13 -
■
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990
ZONING FILE #1589-BLUE CONTINUED
elevations. He stated that he intends to change tne roof
structure on the house in the near future.
There were no comments from the public pertaining to this
application and the Public Hearing was closed.
Mabusth asked Mr. Blue whether he intends
alterations to the deck. She informed him that
necessary to apply for a variance to do so.
to make any
it would be
Mr. Blue stated that he does not intend to do anything with
the deck.
Kelley asked Mr. Blue whether there are frost footings under
the deck.
Mr. Blue indicated that the deck has a floating slab.
Bellows noted that a lot coverage Variance of .046% is also
a consideration in this application.
It was moved by Hanson, seconded by Moos, to recommend
approval of the side and front street setbacks Variances and the
lot coverage Variance to reconstruct a garage addition. Further
it is recommended that approval be given for a sideyard setback
Variance for any possible repairs to the existing porch. Kelley
asked whether frost footings will be placed under the garage.
Mr. Blue indicated that he did not intend to have frost footings.
Mabusth stated that the garage will have to meet the Building
Code. Bellows said, "This is a much more ambitious project than
the drawings indicate. I am uncomfortable with the aspect of
approving something that has not been included in the application
(frost footings for porch). I also believe that the application
is incomplete. I do not object to the project, but I do object
to our voting on it without proper documentation. The
application makes no reference to the roof project. I think it
sets a bad precedent to approve this without having all the
information required. I do not think the elevations provided by
Mr. Blue are sufficient." Kelley suggested that the Planning
Commission and staff should review the issue of application
information at a later time. Motion, Ayes-6, Nays-0, Bellows
abstained. Motion carried.
#1590 MINNEGASCO, INC.
525 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD NORTH
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
PUBLIC HEARING 8:27 P.M. TO 8:40 P.M.
The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were
duly noted.
Mr. Thomas Meyer and Susan Turbes, Minnegasco
- 14 -
i
[
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990
ZONING FILE #1590-MINNEGASCOr INC. CONTINUED
Representatives, were present.
*t-?^usth presented information relating to this application
(s:’ , v.vnn<s Mabusth's memo dated September 12, 1990). She said,
"1 r.;ive received the City Engineer's comments. He has approved
the access. With regard to the concern of hazards created by the
propane, the City Engineer states there is far less hazard with
propane than with gasoline. There is very little opportunity for
there to be an explosion. The City Engineer recommended that
there be Minnegasco staff present while the vaporizing process is
in operation. That is what Minnegasco has proposed."
Mabusth provided pictures of a similar tanker and vaporizer
located in Spring Park.
Kelley asked whether the blue trailer is a permanent
fixture.
Mr. Meyer replied, "The blue trailer will be located in the
fencing during the winter months. In the summer, all of the
equipment will be removed, with the exception of a power pole and
stand pipe that will be installed. The fence will remain on the
property for the entire three to five years."
Bellows noted that the fence will serve only as security,
and not as a means of screening the equipment from view.
Kelley asked whether the site will be illuminated.
Mr. Meyer replied, "There will be a light on during the
operation periods. Perhaps I should explain the process and
purpose. We are trying to provide reliable service for our
customers. Two years ago there was an incident in Mound where
1,000 customers lost gas service for a period of time. The
temperature dropped to more than 20 degrees below zero. The
problem is that the area has been growing faster than Minnegasco
has been able to install additional pipes to provide service.
The problems only occur on rhe extremely cold days of the year,
in the early morning, when there is a maximum demand for gas.
This will provide a temporary solution to that problem until
there is enough of an increase in the area to justify a permanent
solution. That solution is currently being designed, but we
don't anticipate it to be installed for another three to five
years. The unit that is mounted on the trailer will remain on
the site during the winter. When there is a forecast in the
winter for an extremely cold day, the tanker truck will arrive at
the site around 4:00 a.m. The unit would be disconnected around
9:00 a.m. when the process is complete and the tanker will be
removed."
Kelley asked if there is any other location that would be
- 15 -
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990
ZONING FILE I1590-MINNEGASCO, INC., CONTINUED
suitable for this.
Mr. Meyer replied, "We did consider other locations, but
felt that this location is central to where there is the greatest
need. The topography of the land in this location is desirable.
We want a flat site that is just off of a major road and is
readily accessible to our facilities. As a clarification, we
will not be hauling propane as indicated by the City Engineer.
We will haul liquified natural gas. The tank truck is a double-
v/alled truck with a nickel-steel interior. It is designed to
withstand the temperature of the liquified gas which is 260
degrees below zero."
Mrs. Rose Mary Vickerman, 425 North Old Crystal Bay Road,
asked if there will be much additional traffic resulting from
this.
Mr. Meyer replied, "The only additional traffic will be the
tanker truck on extremely cold days. It will arrive and stay on
the site until 9:00 a.m. or so."
Mrs. Vickerman stated that there are many schoolbusses in
that area around 9:00 a.m. She suggested that the tanker be left
on the site until 10:00 a.m.
Mr. Meyer stated that they could probably do that.
Kelley asked how many times last year such a facility would
have been utilized.
Mr. Meyer stated
three times. He said,
may be used more."
that the Spring Park facility was used
"If we have an unusually cold winter, it
Kelley asked if the three to five year term of the
Conditional Use Permit was reasonable.
Mr. Meyer replied, "We would be in this particular location
for a maximum of five years. If the pipe has not been installed
by that time, we would find another location."
There were no additional public comments and the Public
Hearing was closed.
Kelley stated that he would prefer to have the 8’ fence
screened. He added, "I would also like to require that should
the plant material used for screening die, it must be replaced."
Mr. Meyer replied, "Our code does not permit us to have
vegetation in the area of the facility."
- 16 -
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990
ZONING FILE I1590-MINNEGASCO, INC., CONTINUED
Kelley asked whether plant material could be placed outside
of the fence.
Mr. Meyer stated that may be possible. We would have to
request permission from VanDale (owner of the property) to screen
outside of that area.
It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that
screening should be provided on the north, south and west side of
the facility.
It was moved by Kelley, seconded by Moos, to recommend
approval of the C.U.P., with the condition that Minnegasco
provide a sketch plan showing screening for the north, west and
south side of the facility. Motion, Ayes-7, Nays-0, Motion
carried.
(Planning Commissioner Cohen departed at this point of the
meeting.)
#1555 LANDSTAR, INC.
2501 OLD BEACH ROAD
PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING AND RENOTIFICATION
Mr. James MacKinnon, Attorney, and Mr. Dennis
Developer, were present.
Sandin,
Mabusth noted that Mr. MacKinnon had just left the
Minnetonka Beach Planning Commission Meeting. She asked him to
report on the action taken regarding this application.
Mr. MacKinnon said, "The Minnetonka Beach Planning
Commission gave a unanimous recommendation for approval. The
Planning Commission questioned whether we intended to add fill in
a particular location. I informed them we did not. JoEllen Hurr
indicated that she would recommend that the outlot be separated
according to the property within Minnetonka Beach and Orono so
each City will have its own outlot."
Mabusth depicted the outlot to which Mr. MacKinnon referred.
She said, "It is necessary for each City to have a separate
outlot because of the different City Ordinances each City will
use to govern the outlot."
Mr. MacKinnon continued. He said, "Ms. Hurr also indicated
that she may recommend to Council that they not allow any outlot
in that location at all, but require it to be part of Lot One and
Lot Two. She stated that she does not trust the University of
Minnesota. She is concerned that the Foundation may give the
outlot to the University some time in the future. The Planning
Commission did not include that suggestion in their motion. The
- 17 -
i
OKONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990
ZONING FILE #1555-LANDSTAR, INC., CONTINUED
Minnetonka Beach Maintenance Person informed us that a
connection does not exist where we are intending to hook up
water
II
Mabusth replied, "Our City Engineer has reviewed this and he
has recommended that the extension continue up to Lafayette Ridge
so that we can create a loop system. If there is any
discrepancy, we will have the City Engineer review that further."
Mr. MacKinnon said, "The Maintenance Person also told me
that the lower portion of Old Beach Road is asphalt over old
logs. When we run our pump system through there, we will have
trouble. We did receive unanimous approval of the proposal as
presented with no extraordinary recommendations."
Mabusth said, "The wetlands are designated at the 932'
elevation. My memo indicated that I would show the various
building envelopes and area calculations. I will show that now."
Mabusth showed the Planning Commission the building
envelopes for each of the proposed lots in relation to the
setbacks and wetland. She noted that all of the lots easily meet
the half acre dry buildable requirement. Mabusth asked Mr.
Sandin why Lot 8 was being proposed as an outlot. She said,
"That lot satisfies all of the zoning requirements for the B-4
Zoning District."
Mr. Sandin replied, "If we had showed that lot as something
other than an outlot, it would have been necessary to show an
access from County Road 19 and to determine a building pad."
Mabusth said, "That lot is a commercial lot, not
residential. Also, it may be necessary for the Freshwater
Foundation to go through a re-plafing process to convert Outlot
B to a lot. According to Orono's Code, it is not possible to
construct anything on any outlot."
Mr. MacKinnon agreed that Outlot B should be a lot. He
asked Mabusth if a sufficient review has been done to confirm
that Outlot B does in fact comply with the necessary standards to
be a lot.
Mabusth indicated that such confirmation has been made.
Mr. MacKinnon said, "Then we would like to make this a lot."
Kelley asked how large the houses proposed for these lots
will be.
Mr. Sandin replied, "The houses will be approximately 4,000
to 5,000 s.f."
- 10 -
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990
ZONING FILE #1555-LANDSTAR, INC., CONTINUED
Mr. Dave Schneider, Old Beach Road, expressed his
regarding the location of the driveways in relation
intersection of Old Beach Road and County Road 19.
concern
to the
Mabusth stated that the City will exercise caution in
locating the driveway accesses. She informed Mr. Schneider that
this proposal is only preliminary and that necessary changes will
be made prior to final approval.
Kelley said, "We are specifically designating the building
envelopes in this subdivision. In the past, there have been
cases where house plans have been in excess of v/hat
pre~designated building pads will allow. The City has been asked
to grant Variances in those situations. I am stating my position
at this time. I am not going to recommend approval of any
Variances for any of these lots. That is my personal opinion.
These lots are very unique because of the wetland and Old Beach
Road."
Mabusth noted that these lots will not only be controlled by
setback standards, but also by lot coverage requirements.
Mr. MacKinnon stated that he will draft a memo to his client
in that regard.
There were no additional comments from the Public regarding
this application and the Public Hearing was closed.
It was moved by Johnson, seconded by Hanson, to recommend
approval of the Preliminary Subdivision for E.IV. Blanch at 2501
Old Beach Road, subject to staff recommendations A through G, and
Chairman Kelley's notice to the Developer regarding future
Variances for houses constructed in this subdivision. Bellows
added that this site is very sensitive and that the City will
make every attempt to assure that the delicate character is
maintained. Kelley asked whether Mr. Blanch has considered
donating the Outlet to the Nature Conservancy or the City of
Orono to assure that it will be protected. Mr. MacKinnon stated
that Mr. Blanch is on the Board of the Freshwater Foundation.
Motion, Ayes-6, Nays-0. Motion carried.
COMMENTS OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE
COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 10, 1990
Moos briefly discussed the Rebers application.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES-AUGUST 20, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
It was moved by Johnson, seconded by Hanson, to approve the
minutes of the August 20, 1990 Planning Commission Meeting.
Motion, Ayes-6, Nays-0. Motion carried.
- 19 -
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990
PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE
It was agreed that Jeff Johnson would be the Planning
Commission Representative at the October 8, 1990 Council Meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
The September 17, 1990 Planning Commission meeting adjourned
at 9:17 p.m.
- 20 -