Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-01-1982 Planning Minutesm L - 4m I AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:30 PM MONDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 1982 Council Representative - Mary Butler Call to Order 1. Call to order/roll Action Items 2. #666 Vicki Wisegarver & Tom Brokl, 3800 Wayz Conditional Use Permit Work Session 3. #669 Tonka Properties, 1340 Baldur Park Subdivision wc:.- ■.."■O I! .;-' Sketch Plan Review f. ■. / > ‘/-I'V ■4- -'Vr- ^ r 4. #671 Schlee Builders, 3660 Shoreline Drive Subdivision i Information Items 5. Marina Committee Meeting to be held on Februa 1982 at 4:30 PM 6. Edward Callahan to represent the Planning Conn at Council meeting of February 8, 1982. 7. Charles Kelley to represent the Planning Commission at Council meeting of February 22, 1982. 8. Joint Planning Commission and Council meeting on January 30, 1982 at 8:30 AM at the Lafayette Club. Approval of Minutes 9. Approval of the Planning Commission minutes of January 1982. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF FEBRUARY 1, 1982 S.- The Planning Commission met on the above date. The fol­ lowing members were present: Chairman Hammerel, Kelley, Callahan, Goetten, McDonald, Rovegno and Opheim. Mary Butler represented the City Council. Mabusth and Jacobs represented the City staff. Vicki Wisegarver and Tom Brokl were present. Rovegno noted that from 1967 to 1977 no building permits were ever issued for any of the changes that they made. Mabusth asked the Planning Commission if the new proposal without a residential unit would be considered a use variance. Kelley explained that the definition defined in the Resolution was very clear that a resident had to live on the property in order to operate the store. Goetten stated that originally it was just a fruit and vegetable stand plus living quarters. Mabusth noted that the Cirspinski's expanded on their original conditional use permit which already was a non conforming use. Callahan stated that the original intention was for a residence issue and that the Planning Commission's review should deal with the merits and proposed level of the commercial use in relation to the original conditional use permit issued to the Cirspinskis. Rovegno stated that even if a residence was located within the existing building it should have a minimum size requirement. He noted that this would involve an increase in structural expansion of a non conforming structure and that the building permit can only allow expansion for the residential unit. Applicant submitted a floor plan drawing showing the Planning Commission the relation of the commerical area to a potential living area. ATTENDANCE 7:30 PM VICKI WISEGARVER & TOM BROKL 3800 Wayzata Blvd. Conditional Use Permit #666 I 4 < I/;-;*,./. ■ x r •'•V ^ . ”.r f 'l- . ^ mmmm •V- .7^-. ^ I : • ; ■ ■ ■ > McDonald read section 31.109 from the code on alterations. Rovegno stated the square feet or area of the commercial useage must have limitations but did not feel there should be any for residential. Callahan stated that they should see some type of plan showing residential and commercial. Planning Commission stated that this was concept rather than design. •MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF FEBRUARY 1, 1982 Page 2 % It I Applicant asked what a legal residence was considered in Orono? Mabusth stated that a legal residence is defined in the State Building Code, and this would be the standard that Orono would use. Rovegno noted that this residence was ih>t to be rental residence. Mrs. Wisegarver told the Planning Commission of the history of the property owners. She stated that the property was now owned by a trust which was her five children. The court allowed this because there was no child support for her children and there was no other means of support. Would this mean that the five children would have to live on the property? Hammerel stated that the original applicant did farm the property across the street but can the City deny on the change in total use of subject and surrounding properties. Opheim asked if this is a trust or corporation with a residence on it who or what individual would want to live on the property. Applicant stated that he would hire a manager to live on the property and manage the store. Rovegno asked the applicant for the proposed hours of operation and the number of employees. Applicant stated the hours would be from 7:00 AM to 9:00 PM 7 days a week. The number of employees weren't decided on yet but approximately 2 full time employees would be hired. Mabusth stated that the Planning Commission should set a limit on the signage that the business would use. Rovegno stated that non conforming uses usually have no standards to follow and that the City Planner should address the lack of standards for non conforming uses when recodification is done. Callahan asked the applicant about the greenhouse useage Applicant stated that the plastic structure was removed and that the shed like structure was not a greenhouse. They had no definite plans as of yet. Kelley stated that the legal access should be Highway 6 and that the access off Highway 12 should be eliminated. (WISEGARVER CONT. )' MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF FEBRUARY 1, 1982 Page 3 Rovegno moved to approve the conditional use permit for Vicki Wisegarver and Tom Brokl for the opening of the Kellers Market located at 3800 Wayzata Boulevard, finding that in September of 1968 a conditional use permit was issued to 12 High Market for one building (49 x 60) for the selling of vegetables, fruits, and groceries plus living quarters and a storage building for a shared use for both residential and retail use, but more residential use than retail, and subject to the following conditions: (WISEGARVER CONT. 1 - The retail use is to be an accessory use to the primary residential use. 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 10 - 11 - 12 - 13 - The retail part of the building is not to be expanded, but residential may be expanded upon application to the City by the applicant. The applicant must cut back on commercial useaqe of structure now totaling 1801 sf of the total structure of 2842 sf. Further access to be limited to Highway 6 and tne access off Highway 12 is to be eliminated. 12 parking stalls to be maintained. Parking 3' off Highway 12 and the 20' setback line is to be maintained off County Road 6. Signage should not exceed 60 sf based on lineal width of the building, also the City will not allow flashing lights, or any other type of signage which will distract drivers on Highway 12. Old greenhouse structure is not to be used as a green­ house but to be used for residential storage only. Hours of operation are to be from 7:00 AM to 9:00 PM, 7 days a week and not to exceed this. Number of full time employees shall never have more than 6 in the store at any one time. Applicant must complete all improvements required to bring structure up the the building code, state electrical code, state fire code, and Orono's septic code prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. All retail and residential quarters are to meet code requirements and conditions setforth in Resolution #1239. Dwelling unit will be utilized by individual involved in operation of store on a daily basis. Dwelling unit shall be occupied by a full-time manager/operator/owner of the business. This dwelling unit must be the manager's primary residence. Dwelling unit shall not be rented out to a disinterested party. Existing septic tank must be pumped on a regular basis to be determined by staff if approved septic system is not installed prior to opening of store. Tax parcels must be combined before the opening of the retail business and prior to certificate of occupancy. Hammerel seconded. Vote: Ayes (7), Nays (0). 1. i ■V MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF FEBRUARY 1, 1982 Page 4 Gene Earnst and Gary Peterson were present. Applicant stated that there already existed on the property an excessive amount of hardcover. The 1978 proposal would have created more hardcover than the current proposal. TONKA PROPERTIES 1340 Baldur Park Subdivision #669 Staff noted errors in the applicant's hardcover cal­ culations and advised applicant that in comparing the 1978 proposal with the present proposal that there is more proposed hardcover in the 1982 plan. Opheim noted that this was a new application submitted by the criteria of today. Hardcover considerations- would be relative to the current plan and this Coniiuission* s review. Peterson noted that this type of plan would benefit all the neighbors because the road would be completed and upgraded. Kelley asked if this was a private road or a public road? Peterson stated that it would be public upto the cul de sac but they had problems in acquiring the right of way on Baldur Park Road to complete the public road access. Mabusth asked Peterson what type of ownership he had over the property? Peterson stated that he was the fee owner. He noted that in 1978 he owned all of it except Lot 30 but now he owns this lot too. Callahan noted that from looking at the 1978 plan and the current survey that the peninsula was getting smaller by erosion. Peterson stated that actually they had gained some 100' since the time of the original plat in the early 1900's. Goetten stated that the existing hardcover was already too high and that the peninsula piece of property has severe limitations. She stated that she went out on the property herself and she could not see how they could build any more on this property. Applicants felt that they were being penalized by the shape of the property because on any other piece of property they could have more hardcover but since this was a peninsula area that they could not. n % titiih m WiiUT=1 I <v fm i* ■M •r#w Mfiira LSl*PV«i railfS I ■ ■ ■ M ILSllPVij M meeting of FEBRUARY 1, 1992 Page 5 the property was very mansion, since this iinsula, this was a ragile property. The development, (tonka CONT.) mal increase in hardcover ardcover allowed ons. te new problems with deals different with developmentuck under garages, etc. for this type ot suitable for high be controlled. the guestion but yoing into the lake. s almost too much peninsula. ed him to go back hat they approved hors were in favor ng to tell you >us for this piece he density credits. the City with a n was the hardcover. like to issue Bt the codes. 5011 as to how 2 building lots d two. to one than no embers on just 2. m % Vi MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF FEBRUARY 1, 1982 Page 6 McDonald agreed with 2 units. Opheim stated no more than 1. (TONKA CONT.> Rovegno stated that he would go along with 2 building sites but suggested that the developers use a little creativity like earth sheltering to help on the building density. Mabusth stated that now that the Planning Commision had decided on two buildable the existing road serving the two lots would be a private drive and the existing driveway would remain. Goetten asked if the City would require a cul de sac? Kelley stated that since there would only be two he ss that no cul de sac should be required. Butler stated a cul de sac would aid and abet snow plows and would improve present situation. Rovegno stated that anything would be better than a cul de sac maybe a T design. Hammerel stated that the Planning Commission would like to see a letter of credit assuring sewer hookup to the old Olson residence. Cpheim noted for the record Ordinance 31.841. No action was required. Russ Feirst and Jim DeBenedict were present. Callahan stated that the Planning Commission should first look at the court order approving 36 buildable units on the Tonka land and the 24 units approved for the Theater land. Rovegno stated that they should consider the site as one piece of land rather than two and should also consider the sewer capacity. Callahan stated that they should fall back on the court order. Goetten stated that the two main points that should be addressed was access and sewer. Mabusth stated that the access on Shoreline was approved by Hennepin County Highway Department for 24 unit use level. SCHLEE BUILDERS 3660 Shoreline Dr. Subdivision #671 I •, t r.) " 'Vi^! X minutes of the planning commission meeting of FEBRUARV 1, 1982 Page 8 m Hammerel agreed with the rest nf « u McDonald abstained. " his second^choiceVas attached orcnoice was the 48 single family residential = With the • both, but density is to ftay consilJen? with°?he'Sode!" roarp?ar«f tte^36*^Snit^coSr^ l^der^ comment on the to acoo^date^the"60^TOits?^" would the sewer be able r^?irercoup?efwoM?d J^he'thls^'"" ?lr=?L‘-" — -- -- - revieweraglin*'!3ith ‘the^new%oposar.°^^ (SCHLBE CONT.> action was required. ofThe®PlMning%^i|gIon^m® 1982, minutes amendments aiS^addSs? ^he Callahan seconded. Vote: Ayes (7), Nays (O). The Planning Commission adjourned at 11:00 pm. approval of MINUTES adjournment 11:00 PM ■ f, y ^ r • ■. -■ * ; ^ik Mx /' > v.Wi li -S" 4. • ■i'. -V r ..