Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-21-2022 Planning Commission Minutes MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION November 21,2022 6:00 o'clock p.m. ROLL CALL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Chair Mark McCutcheon,Commissioners Chris Bollis,Dennis Libby,Jon Ressler,and Alternate Gary Kraemer. Commissioners Bob Erickson, Scott Kirchner and Matt Gettman were absent.Representing Staff were Community Development Director Laura Oakden, City Planner Melanie Curtis,and City Planner Natalie Nye. Chair McCutcheon called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Bollis asked to move item 3 to item 1,noting he has a time constraint and needs to be present for that item. Chair McCutcheon agreed. Bollis moved,Ressler seconded, to approve the Agenda as amended.VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0. APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OF OCTOBER 17,2022 Libby moved,Bollis seconded,to approve the minutes of the Orono Planning Commission meeting of October 17,2022.VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0. PUBLIC HEARINGS 3. LA22-000054 DAVID CHARLEZ DESIGNS,3275 CARMAN ROAD, REQUESTS AN AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK VARIANCE FOR A NEW HOME. David Zweber, David Charlez Designs,was present. Kraemer recused himself from the item,noting it involves his company. City Planner Nye gave a presentation on the item, stating the Applicant is proposing to construct a new single-family home on the subject property which is located on a peninsula;therefore, it has an extreme average lakeshore setback(ALS). The current house is completely within the ALS and encroaches into the 75 foot lakeshore setback. The Applicant is proposing a new home in a similar footprint which will be compliant with all setback requirements including the 75 foot lakeshore setback but will be completely within the ALS similar to the existing home. Staff agrees with the Applicant's assessment of practical difficulties due to the unique location on the peninsula causing no conforming building envelope. Staff recommends approval of the requested variance. Chair McCutcheon opened the public hearing at 6:07 p.m. There were no public comments. Chair McCutcheon closed the public hearing at 6:07 p.m. The Commissioners discussed the item,noting it is improving the situation. Page 1 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION November 21,2022 6:00 o'clock p.m. Ressler moved,Bollis seconded,to LA22-000054,3275 Carman Road,Variance.VOTE: Ayes: 4, Nays 0. 1. LA22-000050 MATT JOHNSON, 1003 WILDHURST TRAIL(INCLUDING PIDS 07-117- 23-21-0006; 07-117-23-21-0007; 07-117-23-21-0016; 07-117-23-21-0002),REQUESTS VACATION OF UNIMPROVED RIGHT-OF-WAY. Matt Johnson,Applicant,was present. City Planner Curtis gave a presentation on the item, stating the Applicant is requesting to vacate the unimproved portions of right-of-way adjacent to his property. This includes the right-of-way of Lafayette Avenue, Grandview Place,Hattie Place, and the alley running down the middle. There is an existing City sewer line within the Hattie Place right-of-way serving the home at 1003 Wildhurst Trail in addition to an overhead power line running from north to south. If vacated,the Applicant has proposed maintaining a utility easement serving these structures. In 2018 under application#LA18-000065,the City reviewed a subdivision sketch plan for the properties associated with 1003 Wildhurst Trail(including the 10 acre property to the west).The project included vacation of the subject rights-of way and development of the properties into 7 total lots At that time,the Planning Commission and Council were open to the proposal for vacating the rights-of-way as long as access to Saga Hill Park was maintained;they were not in favor of the overall project resulting in the creation of substandard lots.The City's Engineers reviewed the proposal and do not oppose the vacation of Lafayette Avenue, Grandview Place,and the alley;the Engineer recommends the City not vacate Hattie Place indicating that portion of right-of-way provides public benefit with the sanitary sewer utilities and potential future access to abutting parcels. The corridors addressed in this application have not been identified as lake access points in the City's Comprehensive Plan.The Minnesota DNR has reviewed the request and provided comments included in the packet.The DNR opposes the vacation indicating that it does not provide a public benefit nor protect future public use of land abutting the lake.Utility companies have been notified and none opposed the vacation.Public comments have been received and have been included in the packet. Staff recommends approval of the vacation of Lafayette Avenue, Grandview Place,and the alley; Staff recommends denial of Hattie Place at this time. Matt Johnson clarified he is on the City Council and is purchasing this property for himself,he is not selling it to anyone else and it is not for a development purpose but for his family. He shared he will be available after the meeting to address any questions from neighbors.Mr.Johnson noted he was not on the City Council in 2018 when it was voted on to vacate the right-of-ways. He spoke about Forest Bay vacations due to platting extending into Lake Minnetonka,and in speaking with a surveyor the platting was done prior to the Gray's Bay Dam which brought the lake water level up 10-12 feet.Mr.Johnson stated many of the properties on Forest Bay have had vacations because otherwise they would not own any lakeshore.Regarding this particular parcel,the owners did not elect to take advantage of the vacation on Wildhurst Trail as did other neighbors.He provided an illustration showing vacations on the block and what he is requesting and spoke about the three PIDs in this application. Mr.Johnson stated he hopes to have his parents living on the site with his family and hopes to be a good neighbor to everyone. Ressler asked if there are sketches of what Mr.Johnson proposes to put on the site. Mr.Johnson replied until it is approved there is not much sense in getting too far down the road of what it would be. Page 2 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION November 21,2022 6:00 o'clock p.m. Libby asked what the total buildable portion would be. Mr. Johnson replied it is a one acre zone so there would be two that would be 1.5 acres and one that would be just under 1.5 acres. He noted there will not be any non-conforming lots from his ownership. Chair McCutcheon opened the public hearing at 6:27 p.m. Brian Turbeville, 997 Wildhurst Trail,is concerned that this is putting the cart before the horse.In granting the vacation of these pieces,words are words about what will be constructed on the property. Ultimately, as stated by the DNR there is no public benefit for vacating these PIDs.From his understanding the other access to the lake has been contested multiple times at City Council and City Planning.He said the way the landscaping is set up on that property there is no access to the lake, so that property is inaccessible by the public.He has given some written comment and he and his wife are opposed to this without knowing what will happen on the property. He thinks it is extremely relevant to know what will happen to the 10 acres on the other side and believes the potential owner of that property is here and stated the 2020/2040 Comprehensive Plan states it is intended to be mostly rural,keep things natural,and there is an abundance of wildlife in those woods with the 10 acres abutting Saga Hill Park. Penny Saiki,2874 Casco Point, stated last Monday at the City Council meeting,Mayor Walsh reminded them that Council Members are elected and charged to work for the citizens.Many vote and do not pay attention,trusting that those elected are acting in good faith for the public purpose.Ms. Saiki was jolted awake by the Star Tribune article on the vacancy of the fire lane and City-paid cul-de-sac for the benefit of Commissioner Erickson who donated$100,000 to the parks making it a tax deduction.Rumor has it that it will be listed in 2023 for$300,000. If the Erickson's return all of it to the parks or other City coffers it will restore her faith in his doing it for the public good, future tax deduction aside. This land at 1003 Wildhurst Trail and proposed vacation of City easements has come up many times before.The DNR is against the vacancy because it is not in the public interest. On October 8,2018,the City Council discussed the development and said they wanted to preserve the open character of Orono and hold to the Comprehensive Plan. While holding to the Comp Plan the Codes are morphing,attempting to make it easier to improve a property and in the process,variances are being granted to Ordinances. Ordinances are laws and Ms. Saiki said to be aware as the City alters the laws,liability enters the picture. Councilman Johnson, as a real estate agent requesting this vacation, owes transparency on the transaction of exchange of real property.There needs to be disclosure of the value of the lane presently owned before and after the vacation and the good that it is to the public. Alena Severson,4635 Tonkaview Lane, said regarding the 10 acre lot, she is in a purchase agreement for 5 acres of it to build a single-family home,they will not tear down the trees,and will keep it simple and small. She clarified Mr. Johnson will have the other 5 acres and it will be two separate lots,rather than a development which are the rumors going around. She does not think Mr.Johnson's property has a fire lane that anyone would have access to the lake right now. She clarified they do not have any plans to vacate from the park down to Wildhurst, either. Barbara Schmidt,50 Landmark Drive,noted when looking up 1003 Wildhurst Trail the 10 acre lot comes up which is really confusing. Curtis clarified they were all previously in common ownership. Ms. Schmidt noted it was not in the presentation. Page 3 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION November 21,2022 6:00 o'clock p.m. Curtis replied it is not part of the application. Ms. Schmidt stated it is super misleading and the public should know all that the previous commenter shared. She thinks for full disclosure it looks bad and they need to tell the public. Curtis noted the other property will be a public hearing when there is a subdivision application and will be a public process. Ms. Schmidt stated last year the Planning Commission was asked to vacate Lake Minnetonka public access lakeshore on Stubbs Bay and voted against it. Ultimately the City Council voted to vacate the land and it went to a sitting Planning Commissioner, Bob Erickson,for his own wealth and portfolio.This is a similar situation,it is not fair,and all citizens should have access to this type of vacation. If they are going to vacate this,it should be open to the public and they should ask all the neighbors if they want a piece of it.The question is whether this is in the best interest of the Orono citizens and that should be asked over and over in all of these deals. Several City officials and the DNR have said it is not in the best interest for Orono,both for Mr.Erickson's deal and this deal. Many citizens voiced their concern that this is depleting public land assets and she would like to know how much public land has been given away since Mayor Walsh came into office.Privatizing lake access or land for one individual does not help all of them. The Planning Commission is being asked to vacate this land to benefit a sitting Orono City Council Member,Mr.Matt Johnson, for his own wealth portfolio. She asked the Commissioners to vote to benefit the Orono citizens and not just single individuals. Chair McCutcheon noted Commissioner Bollis must leave at this time(6:38 p.m.) and they have four Commissioners present which is a quorum. Carol Price,2813 Casco Point Road, finds it extremely unfair that they are giving away land to an individual and whether they have good intentions or not, it is not for the benefit of the citizens of Orono. She would like the Planning Commission and City Council to take into account that they need some of these open spaces and access points. Over the years it does tend to creep in by the neighbors and pretty soon the access point is gone.Regarding a recent fire in her neighborhood,the fire department had a terrible time getting through the properties to put out a fire.The public needs to preserve these open areas and as a retired person on a fixed income,Ms. Price does not like giving away pieces of land. If the City wanted to sell this land it would make a different point for her and would be an open discussion. She said to sell these plots of land if they are thinking of tax implications but not to give them away.Ms. Price asked them to look judiciously at the access points they currently have because the City needs them for years to come and they cannot be short-sighted. Melissa Munsch, 1001 Wildhurst Trail,is next to the Applicant's property and sent an email with concerns. She does not understand the overlying purpose of the Applicant's use of land.The previous property owner never requested the vacation and if Mr. Johnson is planning to use the property for himself,she does not understand why he needs to make this request. Tom Fleck, 995 Wildhurst Trail,did not understand there was a lake access there but thinks they need to look to the future and what the City needs 50 or 100 years from now. If they give it up they are giving it up forever. Mr.Fleck does not know much about the project yet as he just received the package on Friday and he would like to learn more.He hopes the Commissioners can table it until he can learn more and speak with Mr.Johnson. Page 4 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION November 21,2022 6:00 o'clock p.m. Charles Price,2813 Casco Point Road,has been a property investor all his life. He has a hard time wrapping his head around giving land away for free.He would understand if someone looked at the fair market value and if the City ever needed it back they would pay a huge number of dollars to reestablish what they are about to give away for free.Mr.Price is somewhat assuaged by what he has heard,he actually thought this would give water access.As long as they kept the north/south link on the west side, kept the northern link, and then came back to the south it looks like it almost gives lake access,although it may miss it by a few feet. It is so close Mr. Price almost thinks they are giving away lake access. Penny Saiki said when one-googles 1003 Wildhurst Trail it comes up as an R-shaped property,but the title of the three parcels all say Matt Johnson. She asked when he bought 1003 Wildhurst Trail did those three parcels come with it? Curtis replied Mr.Johnson bought all three PIDs and she does not know the timing or terms of the purchase. Ms. Saiki stated the big question is that none of them know the intention of Mr.Johnson. Mr.Turbeville said regarding the Morgart property since Chris passed away, over the summer there was a lot of activity in the existing house(R-shaped area)with cars,trucks,bobcat,and trailers coming and going. Ironically,the postcard went out and all activity stopped over the past couple weeks. He noted the postcard did not go to people across the street and does not know that accurate public notification has gone out. Once the land is vacated,Mr.Johnson can say he will put one house up,the others can say they will put one house on the other 10 acres,but this is step one to getting a bigger development built. He asks the Commissioners to vote no. Loren Schoenzeit,4480 Forest Lake Landing,is a former member of the Planning Commission and thinks what is important here is that the plan is incomplete. He encourages the Commission to table until there is a comprehensive plan for the site to understand the density,building, and other pieces. He noted Planning Commission 101 is to never give away an easement unless there is something returned in trade of value to the City. Today that area being vacated is used by snowmobiles and the other piece is to keep the existing utility easement for access through that property because if anyone hits a pole on County Road 19 the entire energy grid section goes out. He understands for Mr.Johnson the more one draws,the more it costs,but a plan would help everyone understand the land use planned for the area. Chair McCutcheon closed the public hearing at 6:52 p.m. Chair McCutcheon noted there is precedent and history of re-platting and vacating these"slices."In looking at emails and comments,what is the plan and City benefit here?He would like to hear the Commissioners' comments,as well as comments on snowmobiles as they would have to cross private property to access the lake. Ressler thanked citizens and neighbors for coming to express their concerns.He noted Forest Lake has some very strange platting as already identified.There is history of another vacation under similar circumstances that Ressler was in support of and there is a tug-of-war between maintaining what Orono has and allowing people to use and develop their property.Ressler noted City Staff does a nice job to support citizens and try to make things work.Regarding the other vacated lot,giving away land is relevant to its use and purpose. The way this land is guided,Ressler does not know how public use could Page 5 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION November 21,2022 6:00 o'clock p.m. ever be provided for this parcel. In the handout it says"dense vegetation, steep topography, shallow water depths,undesirable lake bottoms"all in description of this particular parcel. He thinks it is relevant and prudent to ask the Applicant what his intended use is and Ressler did ask that as it could potentially be a condition as it goes to the City Council.Ressler does not find the 10 acre parcel to be particularly relevant as any landowner can develop within the guidelines of what is afforded.Regarding access,there are many other places that will be utilized by the fire department before this would be in putting out a fire. Candidly, if the fire department needs to utilize any water on the lake they will go on private property to do so to put the fire out. Ressler would be in support of this vacation for the same reasons he was supportive of the other vacation he spoke of. Libby thanked the citizens that spoke up.He also noted they are dealing with private,residential sales between individuals and they are here to discuss the vacation of the right-of-ways,not the private property ownership of larger portions of the lot. There are methodologies and negotiations between the owner and the City that can remediate some of the objections,such as the utility easements which can be carried over. He noted facing the Applicant is a gauntlet of scrutiny,approvals,engineering,and they will not be able to willy-nilly acquire these easements and then do whatever they want.The City has a very well-written 2040 Comp Plan that addresses many of the issues that citizens tonight have expressed. Libby shared a concern as he sees a private property ownership in between any access to the marsh that would potentially be an access to the lake. The snowmobiling that is happening there should be done with privileged permission from the property owners that have a sliver of a lot between one of these vacated portions and the marsh.Libby does not disfavor the conditional approval by Staff and thinks it is somewhat prudent.In the case of Hattie Place,he feels it could be remediated or negotiated between the vacation and the Applicant. Kraemer thinks Ms. Curtis did a great job of presenting the item. When he hears the term"precedent"it is pretty powerful and the City has done this in other places.He is in support. Chair McCutcheon noted no one really has access to the lake unless they go across private property. Regarding the narrow lanes through the lots,he thinks there is an opportunity to fix them.He does see a need regarding Hattie Place to provide utility which he believes Staff recommended. Chair McCutcheon thinks a garage is on that property and asked the Commissioners if they are in favor of all the vacations or some that should remain. Libby said in the packet it states the Applicant has proposed maintaining utility easements. Curtis showed an image on screen,noting Staff recommends vacation of the yellow areas, and are recommending the brown areas be maintained as right-of-way. Ressler thinks before it goes to the City Council, some research should be done regarding future intent of using that for utilities. If there is no future intent of turning that into a public access,Ressler does not have opposition to it. He would be in support of maintaining that public right-of-way if there is intention of future use.He cautions tabling the item as he is not sure it would change the Commissioners' opinions besides comments that have been made. Curtis replied there are utilities in the Hattie Place right-of-way now, including an overhead powerline and a sewer line. It would maintain the easement while vacating the land. Chair McCutcheon is in favor noting the yellow areas seem to make it cleaner. Page 6 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION November 21,2022 6:00 o'clock p.m. Mr.Johnson,Applicant,shared regarding Hattie Place that all utility providers were notified and the power line that comes down is overhead. There is also a manhole at the beginning of the driveway. He has been talking with the utility company about burying that power line to give more stability.Mr. Johnson understands that utility easements will run that entire length of the property and clarified none of the other vacation requests has a utility on them.He stated they did not request vacation of the southern portion which the other neighbors all received. Libby asked Mr.Johnson about the old garage that encroaches on the easement and if that would remedy it. Mr.Johnson replied it would remedy it as it puts the garage in compliance. He was looking at remodeling the rambler for his parents and would not be able to attach a garage on that property because of the easement which runs right up next to the house. It cleans up the fact that the City allowed that garage there and it would get rid of the non-conformity. Libby thinks it is very important for people to speak their mind during public comments.He thinks it is unfortunate when they take time with hearsay and conjecture that is not empirically based in fact. Libby has been a real estate broker for 35 years and during Covid when they did not have the ability to register deeds the deputy registrars were months behind. He clarified when one is not seeing a deed filing it is because they are still catching up from being months behind during Covid.He believes it was a wrong pursuit to try to discredit another property owner in Orono because one could not find the deed as it was not the property owner's fault. Ressler summarized he is in support of the vacation due to precedence and does not see a way that it would be suitable for the City's public use without substantial investment in some sort of imminent domain because it is landlocked. If there is an amount of money to be exchanged and settled upon,he is fine with that and thinks that is reasonable but he is not qualified to determine how much that would be. Utilities have been addressed this evening and the easement will remain intact.Ressler would generally be in support as long as there are no rights being given up for the City to provide utility. This is the ability to clean up some parcels and supports the application as applied. Chair McCutcheon is in support of the yellow area and thinks there is a sticking point on the orange area. Kraemer thinks Ressler said it well. Ressler moved,Kraemer seconded,to approve LA22-0000.50, 1003 Wildhurst Trail as applied. VOTE: Ayes: 4,Nays 0. 2. LA22-000051 PAUL TAUNTON,3600 IVY PLACE,REQUESTS AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE APPROVAL FOR HARDCOVER WITHIN THE 75-FOOT SETBACK FOR A PARKING AREA. City Planner Curtis gave a presentation on the item, stating the Applicant is requesting after-the-fact approval of variances for hardcover within the 75 foot setback. In September,the City received and confirmed a complaint regarding a new parking area under construction on the property. The property owner installed an approximate 1,100 square foot paver parking area within the 75 foot setback connected to the existing driveway. Upon review, Staff noted two additional unapproved patio improvements on the Page 7 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION November 21,2022 6:00 o'clock p.m. property with a 500 square foot firepit/patio on the north portion 43 feet from the Ordinary High Water Level(OHWL)and a 470 square foot firepit/patio area 50 feet from the OHWL on the east side of the home. The Applicant has identified lot size, shape, and safety as practical difficulties supporting the driveway variance and has not addressed the firepit/patio areas.The parking area is situated 31 feet from the OHWL where a 75 foot setback is required. Additionally, it exceeds the 8-foot permitted width of an allowed driveway encroachment within the 75 foot setback. Two new patio areas are in the 75 foot setback where hardcover is not permitted. Based on the updated as-built survey and hardcover calculations there is approximately 3,600 square feet of hardcover within the 75 foot setback where 657 square feet was approved. Curtis stated that 3,029 square feet of new,unapproved hardcover exists on the property within the 75 foot setback.A comment from a neighbor was received that was generally in support of the driveway improvements. This is a newly created lot;the property was platted in 2018 under the City's current regulations.The plans submitted for the 2020 building permit for the home and the current owner provided the allowed driveway access permitted by the Code within the 75 foot setback.The home and driveway were designed to comply as much as feasible with the zoning Codes. Staff does not find practical difficulty supporting any of the after-the-fact hardcover setback variances. Planning Staff recommends denial and further recommends that the hardcover improvements be removed immediately. Jaime Wallis of Chanhassen,on behalf of Applicant Paul Taunton,said the initial violation was in relation to the driveway.The patios did not come up in the violations which is why they had not been addressed prior.Regarding the 8 feet allowed for the driveway,the problem is with the radius of the turn. Mr.Taunton had a driveway study done and one cannot make the turn in or out of the property without encroaching on the neighbor's property and one cannot back out of the driveway. If they had an 8 foot or 11 foot driveway one would generally back out into a two-lane road but in this situation one would have to back out,go approximately 150 yards past three homes to another road to back out of the property. She gave photos to the Commissioners and noted the driveway turn is a significant problem.An easement was granted to access the property and Ms. Wallis stated a delivery driver or Amazon truck cannot get in there because they have to back out the entire length of the road which is a safety hazard. That was the reasoning behind it. Ressler noted Staff clarified how strict the City is,especially with lakeshore setbacks and hardcover, and if there is not a reason to rebuild in like-kind.It looks like it was made abundantly clear in the application. Ressler asked for a comment on the awareness. From Ms.Wallis' understanding,the awareness of the 75 foot setback was there,and in the previous permit or survey that was approved,there is a hump in the purple area that allows for a turn. It was designed not to encroach any further to the lagoon side.Ms. Wallis thinks Mr.Taunton bought a property and was not aware that he could not access the property,build the home he wanted,and is now struggling to get a vehicle out of the property.Putting the patios aside,Mr. Taunton is just looking for some practicality regarding the driveway.Ms. Wallis took a video of trying to get on the property with a standard-sized truck which cannot be done without encroaching on the neighbor's property. Trucks cannot deliver on the property so they park trucks in front of neighbors' houses and block their driveway. Chair McCutcheon asked if the Applicant is concerned about hardcover so close to the lake. Ms. Wallis replied because they are permeable pavers,Mr.Taunton did not believe it was deemed as something that could not be in the space because water can flow through it. She noted he is still within the hardcover for the size of the property but the setback is causing the difficulty as Ms. Wallis understands. Page 8 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION November 21,2022 6:00 o'clock p.m. Chair McCutcheon opened the public hearing at 7:37 p.m. Penny Saiki,2874 Casco Point Road, stated they knew about this from the beginning and if the owner didn't know,the builder did. To say one cannot get out of their garage is a poor design and whoever designed it knew a 24 foot radius for a car is normal. The inside of the house is huge and they could have moved the garage up and had less of a foyer.Ms. Saiki stated it is bad planning on their part and it was not included on the permit. Chair McCutcheon closed the public hearing at 7:38 p.m. Ressler stated it makes sense for a turnaround to be there,however making sense is not a practical difficulty.Approving this would establish precedence for others with this type of application.That is where Ressler struggles. Chair McCutcheon stated in Orono one needs to know about average lakeshore setback(ALS)and he sees three structures now within the ALS which is a bad thing. The City cares about the lake and does not want runoff into the lake.The rules are there for a reason. Kraemer thinks the public comment received that it was very poor planning is very,very accurate. He does not think the Commission wants to set precedent in granting variances after the fact and it is a big red flag. It says that it is okay to do what one wants and then come back and ask for forgiveness.He feels bad that the homeowner did not get better advice or planning on this,but he has a hard time agreeing with the application. Libby noted this could have been remedied if there had been consultation with City engineering; it would have been recommended to build a little less house to allow for a different form of driveway access.The Applicant may not have realized the importance of pulling permits but one cannot create their own practical difficulty and could have built a slightly smaller house.He is not in support and agrees with Staff's recommendations. Chair McCutcheon agrees with Libby. Ressler moved,Libby seconded,to deny LA22-000051 Paul Taunton,3600 Ivy Place VOTE: Ayes: 4,Nays 0. 4. LA22-000055 ESKUCHE DESIGN,3838 CHERRY AVENUE,REQUESTS VARIANCES FOR AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK,75-FOOT LAKE SETBACK,AND HARDCOVER IN ORDER TO CONSTRUCT ADDITIONS TO THE EXISTING HOME. Sara and Travis Wildenberg,Applicants,were present. City Planner Curtis gave a presentation on the item, stating the existing home on the property is situated almost entirely lakeward of the 75-foot setback line;most of the home is also within the average lakeshore setback. The Applicant provided an updated narrative,not included in the planning report, which was emailed and placed at the Commissioners' seats. It includes a revised practical difficulty analysis. The majority of the existing single story home is situated lakeward of the average lakeshore and 75-foot lake setbacks. The lake side deck projects over the OHWL and the lake.The Applicant is Page 9 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION November 21,2022 6:00 o'clock p.m. proposing to increase the ceiling height in the entire main level, reflected in the approximate 2 foot roof height expansion. They are proposing to add a second story over the western portion of home increasing the overall height by 13 feet plus chimneys. There are four areas of footprint expansion proposed,shown in yellow,the largest addition is a 22'x 26.5' garage addition on the rear which meets the required setbacks.The three other footprint expansions include the covered porch entry and 6.5'x 9' addition on the street side of the home 60-feet from the lake, a small addition on the west side of the home 48-feet from the lake,and a small chimney addition on the lakeside of the home. The chimney is approximately 13-feet taller than the existing roof height and will be 18 feet from the lake. The property currently has 33.9%hardcover where 25%is permitted. The majority of the hardcover is located within the 75-foot setback. The Applicant is showing some new areas of hardcover and is proposing to remove 224 square feet of total hardcover resulting in 32.9%hardcover. Staff finds the location of existing improvements impede opportunities for constructing conforming additions,height,or footprint changes to the home. however,the scale of the proposal to expand the non-conformities within the ALS and 75 foot setback are at a level that may not be reasonable.The increase of mass within the setbacks is not supported by practical difficulties and for that reason Staff recommends denial. Sarah and Travis Wildenberg, 1421 North Arm Drive,purchased the property in July 2022.They love the architecture and design, as well as the large front yard.The proposed plans are what they hope will be their forever family home. Peter Eskuche, 18318 Minnetonka Boulevard,Deephaven,has been working with the Applicants to expand the home to fit their family as it is quite a small residence on a slab. Going below ground would not be possible and would be disruptive given the proximity to the lake which is why they decided to design above the main area of the home and garage.He noted they are trying not to increase hardcover because it is so far over.There are also extensive patios along the shoreline which are all being removed, and the shore will be stabilized and restored as much as possible.Mr.Eskuche believes restoring the structure would be less damaging than tearing it down because it is literally on the lake.He noted they are trying to keep the scale of the house to the east as it is a very close proximity. In several areas of the house,Mr. Eskuche is not sure they have 8 foot ceilings so they are trying update the function and scale of the house. Ressler asked if there is a design that allows them to go up without increasing. Mr. Eskuche noted there is a possibility on the lakeside,but the problem is that almost the entire house is within the 75 foot setback.In looking at the upper level plan and east façade,it is possible that not all of that space would be entirely needed. Chair McCutcheon asked if they considered the back of the property behind the average lakeshore setback (ALS). Mr. Eskuche stated they were trying to disturb as little of the property as possible. That would be an exploration if this does not go through,but it is more hardcover. Chair McCutcheon has never seen a house this close to the lake. He noted they have a long driveway which adds hardcover and a house with decking overhanging the lake.He asked if they make an existing situation worse in putting massing inside the ALS. Page 10 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION November 21,2022 6:00 o'clock p.m. Libby thinks whatever could be done here needs to be done and not on the lakeshore side as they need to maintain that setback for the lake and not set precedence. He does not think they can do much to extend and exacerbate an encroachment into the setback. Chair McCutcheon opened the public hearing at 7:59 p.m. John Daly,Revision LLC, 153 East Lake Street,has been working with the Applicants on the project. He understands this is a complex and unique house. If they asked to add a main floor addition into the yard it would have come with a major hardcover request.The current home is small with only one level and by adding the addition over the existing space,they tried to focus on the impact for neighboring properties over the middle of the home. The intent is to protect the hardcover,work within the existing structure, and be mindful of the impact on neighboring properties. They felt tearing down the house and moving it back would have been more disruptive and felt this is a great candidate to remodel.Mr. Daly noted they are trying to solve many challenges to make it a nice family home. Chair McCutcheon closed the public hearing at 8:03 p.m. Kraemer thinks it is a thoughtful design and likes that they are not tearing it down but are keeping the structure that the Applicants have a love for. Kraemer stated if they deny and the Applicant tears it down and brings the structure out of the 75 foot there will probably be more hardcover than the proposed plan. He also likes that they are willing to clean up the shoreline and remove the patios. Chair McCutcheon noted the Commission has actually gone up on these;however when it is inside the ALS,they have never done it before and that is his sticking point.Because they are already over on hardcover,they could really only add structure over the driveway footprint. Ressler thinks in the past the Commission has established adding massing within the 75 foot or ALS of existing dwellings. They do not like it,the closer to the lakeshore the harder it is to approve which is why many boathouses go away and there is a hard line on adding massing for boathouses.Although they do not want to tear it down, if they did it would improve hardcover due to a shorter driveway. Mr.Eskuche noted Minnetonka has an ordinance that allows conforming to the building height as long as it does not encroach more.He asked if that is what the Commissioners are saying would have been okay. Ressler replied the Commission has approved other homes that have gone up in massing within the lakeshore setback as opposed to adding additions of structure in the setback. Curtis clarified the Applicant is essentially going up over existing with the 3-4 small additions. Mr.Ekuche noted there is one section forward of the house and in eliminating that, would they get approval? Ressler replied if they are not adding structure within the setback,the Commission would have a more favorable view but deferred to Staff. Curtis stated the new footprint proposed is the little chimney next to the deck and the area noted onscreen. The project is going up over existing with the exception of the portion over the garage. Page 11 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION November 21,2022 6:00 o'clock p.m. Mr. Eskuche is willing to make an attempt. Ressler clarified the Commission can give feedback and Mr.Eskuche can bring an amended proposal to the City Council. Ressler would be supportive of this if they made those changes discussed. Libby noted in going up over existing is kind of a moot point when there is already such an encroachment into the 75 foot setback.Any massing will not conform to the Comprehensive Plan and the City does not add encroachments into the 75 foot setback. Chair McCutcheon is uneasy with going up and blocking lake view.He would not be in support of the application. Kraemer asked if they could design the chimney within the footprint.He asked if by going upwards they will be blocking someone else's lake views and thinks City Council would want to see a study on that. Community Development Director Oakden clarified that typically the 75 foot setback is the stricter and the average lakeshore setback(ALS)is then set further away from the lake being the limiting factor for a building envelope. This lot is unique in that the ALS is actually the closer setback to the lake and the 75 foot setback is the more-strict setback.The chimney,front door porch addition,and garage space area are all footprint expansions.Regarding the second story expansion which is directly upward,the Commission has acted in support of second story additions in the ALS but oftentimes that does not overlap within the 75 foot setback, as well.This is a very unique layout in that the second story is both in the ALS and in the 75 foot setback in this scenario. Ressler is in support of adding massing but would like to see no addition within the ALS.Anything behind the ALS he would be in support of, as long as it stays in the conformities of structure,hardcover, and is not increasing or worsening that situation. Chair McCutcheon's position is adding massing behind the blue line onscreen but not to increase hardcover which is very hard to do. Ressler noted he cannot approve as applied but thinks they could entertain a motion to decline with feedback for the Applicant to revise plans. He noted it sounds like Kraemer is in support of the application as applied. Chair McCutcheon would decline with feedback that any structure added should be behind the average lakeshore setback(blue line). Libby tends to agree with Staffs initial denial.He agrees with nothing beyond the average lakeshore setback and certainly nothing that would add encroachment into the 75 foot setback. Libby moved,Ressler seconded,to deny LA22-000055 Eskuche Design,3838 Cherry Avenue, Variances.VOTE: Ayes:3,Nays 1 (Kraemer). 5. LA22-000056 PATRICK REGAN WITH JDD STUDIO,200 WOODHILL ROAD, REQUESTS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE FOR AN ADDITION TO AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE RELATED TO A GOLF COURSE USE. Page 12 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION November 21,2022 6:00 o'clock p.m. Patrick Regan,JDD Studio,Applicant, was present. City Planner Nye gave a presentation on the item, stating the Woodhill Country Club is requesting approvals in order to expand an existing accessory building on their site. The Woodhill property is unique in that part of it is located in Wayzata and part in Orono. The country club's main building is located on the Wayzata parcel and the Orono parcel contains several accessory structures including a maintenance building, warming structures, and barn. The proposed addition is to the barn.The barn is currently used for dining and events and is a little over 3,000 square feet. The proposed addition will be approximately 2,000 square feet and will include a new sit-down dining room, expanded kitchen, office, storage space, expanded parking spaces, landscaping,removing gravel areas with a reduction in hardcover of about 1,000 square feet. Staff recommends granting a new conditional use permit(CUP) for the expansion of the barn which keeps things clean for City records. Staff believes all Code requirements for the CUP have been met. Staff agrees with Applicant's assessment of practical difficulty. Staff recommends approval of the requested variance and the conditional use permit. Patrick Regan,JDD Studio,showed the GIS map and spoke about the Orono property of the golf course. The barn proposal is to add a more dedicated dining space, and utilize the barn as a winter clubhouse. Chair McCutcheon opened the public hearing at 8:36 p.m. There were no public comments. Chair McCutcheon closed the public hearing at 8:36 p.m. Kraemer moved,Libby seconded,to approve LA22-000056,200 Woodhill Road, conditional use permit and variance.VOTE: Ayes: 4,Nays 0. OTHER BUSINESS—Update on November 14,2022 City Council Meeting Oakden noted most of the applications the Commissioners saw at the last meeting were approved by City Council. ADJOURNMENT Libby moved,Kraemer seconded,to adjourn the Planning Commission Meeting.VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. The Orono Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 8:41 p.m. ATTEST: ": Mark McCutcheon, Chair Page 13 of 13