Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLA19-84 ExH PC Minutes 08-20-18 FinalMINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 20, 2018 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 5 3. LA18-000068 SVEN GUSTAFSON ON BEHALF OF 1350 BALDUR, LLC, PIDS 08-117-23-31-0006 THROUGH 08-117-23-31-0009, BALDUR PARK ROAD, SKETCH PLAN, 6:38 P.M. – 7:09 P.M. Sven Gustafson, Applicant, was present. Barnhart noted this is a sketch plan application for a plat on Baldur Park to combine four lots into one lot for the purposes of constructing a new single-family home. This is not a subdivision or the splitting of a lot. There is an existing house at the point. When looking at a plat, the City has to look at a couple of different scenarios. When the property is platted in the proposed manner, it will create a back lot, which is prohibited by City ordinances. Barnhart stated there is not a lot of details available in terms of grading or configuration of roads and that the applicant is looking for guidance from the Planning Commission on the issues outlined in the Staff report. Overall the property is generally flat or very close to the ordinary high water line, so flooding or floodplain issues may come into play on this development. A wetland may be located on the site which will need to be delineated. Both of those items are important in determining minimum lot size and more information will need to be provided. Baldur Park is a platted public road and does not actually touch this property on land. A copy of an easement, if one exists, will need to be provided, or else additional information will need to be submitted showing how the property will access the road. Generally a cul-de-sac would be required at the end of a public road to provide a turnaround for emergency vehicles. The lack of frontage onto Baldur Park Road prevents a cul-de-sac within the Baldur Park Road right-of-way unless additional right-of-way is platted. The proposed plat appears to be consistent with the Orono 2030 Community Management Plan. As a sketch plan, it has been submitted to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and those comments will need to be incorporated into the plan at some point. A Conservation Design plan is not required since this is a proposed plat and not a subdivision. A tree removal plan will be required since there are several large trees on the property, many of which will need to be removed to accommodate construction. The issues identified by Staff include frontage of the property. Issues for discussion: 1. Front lot/back lot. Platting the property as proposed will create an easement back lot. Does the Planning Commission feel a waiver from the prohibition of an easement back lot is warranted? 2. The 75-foot lake yard variance. Because of the narrow width of the peninsula, any improvement of the subject lot will require 75-foot lake yard setback variances. Does the Commission support the placement of a lot in the location, requiring variances? An alternative lot location further at the point would prevent the need for a variance. 3. Does the Commission feel that adjustments to the lot area requirements are justified? MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 20, 2018 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 2 of 5 Staff does not support the proposal as drafted due to the following: a. The proposal creates a nonconforming parcel by virtue of creating an easement back lot. b. Access to the lot is in question and information supporting access rights to the development have not been provided. c. The lot proposed requires a lake yard setback to improve the property. Staff recommends a lot be created at or nearer the point that does not require a lake setback to develop. Thiesse asked if they would require 30 feet to create an outlot. Barnhart indicated they would need a 30-foot wide outlot to provide access to the front lot/back lot. The City would also look for some sort of turnaround within the development. This plat is similar to a recent application approved on Ivy Place. In that situation, the developer agreed to provide onsite turnarounds and sprinkler the buildings to help offset the challenges created by the long road ending in a dead end. Thiesse asked what this would do to the development of the next lots down. Barnhart stated the sketch plan does not address that and that they are simply proposing to plat these four lots into one buildable lot. Thiesse asked if it would preclude them from developing those lots. Barnhart stated it would depend on whether the Planning Commission was okay with waiving the access for the proposed lot. The front lot/back lot situation basically allows them to create this lot and then one additional lot that would be accessed via the outlot. Thiesse asked if a cul-de-sac would need to be constructed if the Planning Commission is not agreeable with the front lot/back lot. Barnhart stated that is one of the options. Sven Gustafson, Stonewood, stated this is a unique property since it is located on a peninsula and is narrow. To develop the property in any way would require some variances and that they are here looking for some feedback and direction on how best to proceed with developing it. In regards to the road, currently Baldur Park Road is 12 feet wide and it would not make much sense to have a 24-foot wide road at the end of the 12-foot road. Gustafson stated they are looking at an outlot that would serve some lots beyond this property. Gustafson stated they do not know about the wetlands at this point. Once the wetland is delineated, that will likely drive some changes. Gustafson stated obviously the 75-foot lakeshore setbacks are impossible to meet no matter what they do with the lot lines. Chair Thiesse asked for public comment at 6:49 p.m. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 20, 2018 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 3 of 5 Cindy McDonnell, 1420 Baldur Park Road, stated she has a concern about the proposal. Baldur Park Road is brand new since the flood of 2014, and if this lot requires a lot of fill, the trucks hauling in the fill may damage the road and she would like some assurances that repairs will be made to the road if any occur. McDonnell stated if there is going to be future development down at the peninsula, she would like to see a turnaround since this will generate some additional traffic down the road, which needs to be taken into consideration. Currently the area is somewhat of an eyesore for the whole neighborhood and in her view the neighbors’ property values are being impacted by that. There were no further public comments. Barnhart noted an e-mail was received this afternoon regarding the property, which has been provided to the Planning Commission. Thiesse asked about access. Barnhart stated access can likely be resolved by review of the easement. Gustafson stated there is an easement that provides access across the neighboring property, which is Lot 20, and that he can provide additional information on that. Thiesse asked if he is amenable to moving the house down a couple of lots with a road and cul-de-sac for emergency vehicles. Gustafson stated they will take all the feedback they receive tonight and consider it. Erickson commented it would be nice to see a rough plan for the rest of the area to give the Planning Commission a better idea of what is being contemplated. Thiesse stated the applicant is asking for approval for a portion of the property and that it is likely they will use it as a practical difficulty. Erickson agreed that there is a question about what happens after these variances are granted. Gustafson stated a turnaround or a cul-de-sac for this area probably makes sense, but that a cul-de-sac or turnaround for the entire neighborhood at the end of the road is probably not something the property owners are interested in doing. Thiesse indicated he has difficulty creating a substandard lot but that there is no way to make it a conforming lot in all respects. Thiesse noted the City normally does not allow a front lot/back lot. Gustafson asked whether seeing a proposal that shows development of the entire peninsula would be easier for the Planning Commission. Thiesse commented that would be easier for him and that it appears this site needs the most work. Thiesse stated he would rather see the whole thing and that he has the most difficulty with this lot. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 20, 2018 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 4 of 5 Ressler suggested the applicant counter this plan with something to improve the situation and that they might not necessarily be helping the situation by keeping the road at 12 feet wide. Ressler stated they should look at balancing some of the difficulties the current residents encounter with the road by perhaps adding a turnaround on the property. Gustafson asked whether a turnaround on Lot 21 to allow better neighborhood and emergency vehicle access and turnaround would be beneficial. Thiesse commented that would be something to help the situation. The 75-foot section from two directions is also an issue. Thiesse stated he is not convinced that this is a buildable lot, which is another big concern. Lemke stated he is in agreement and that the proposal seems way too confirmed. Lemke stated in his view there is a need for an emergency vehicle turnaround and that the lot does not seem buildable. Gustafson asked whether emergency vehicles can make it down to the end of the road currently without a turnaround. Barnhart stated they can make it down to the end of the road. Erickson stated in a true emergency, the fire trucks could also cut across somebody’s grass. Lemke stated he would also like to see a complete development plan so he can understand the full impact. Barnhart asked whether the Planning Commission would like to see a conforming access in the back. Thiesse stated that would be his preference. As it relates to the 75-foot setback, Thiesse noted it is a huge property and that they are proposing to chop off a very narrow piece. Thiesse stated he is struggling with the 75-foot setback since he is not convinced it is a buildable lot. Gustafson pointed out they are not chopping off one lot but are rather combining multiple properties into a larger lot. Ressler stated since it is not currently developed, it is a different situation, and that there will be more traffic generated and the need for emergency vehicles to travel down the road will increase. Gustafson stated the current access to the peninsula will not be made more difficult since that is what will remain but that there will just be a house there. Thiesse stated in his opinion it is a substandard road and that there is not much they can do to improve that situation, but they can try to improve whatever else they can. Lemke commented rather than have four unbuildable lots, they now have one unbuildable lot. Thiesse asked whether the Planning Commission feels adjustments to the lot area requirements are justified, including access or easements in lot area. Thiesse stated he is looking at an owner that owns a bunch of property and that there is a neighboring city that requires lots be combined if they are all under the same ownership. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 20, 2018 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 5 Barnhart stated this is a lot of record and that Orono has the same requirement. Barnhart noted the applicants are proposing a plat. Thiesse stated overall he is having difficulty with the 75-foot setbacks, the size of the lot, the access, and the turnaround. Ressler noted wetlands are not included in the lot area calculation. Barnhart stated in his view the issues are addressable and the next step is to take it to the City Council or the applicants can make changes to their proposal and bring it back to the Planning Commission. Gustafson stated they would like to take a look at the larger project and then decide what to do. Thiesse stated in regards to the fill, there typically is an inspection of the road prior to construction and an inspection after construction to determine whether any damage has occurred. Gustafson stated they likely will have to bring in some fill to construct the house, which is typical, but that they will not be filling in the wetland area. The Planning Commission took no formal action on this item.