Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-15-2002 Planning Commission Minutes PUBLIC ATTENDANCE MEETING DATE % (') 1 ❑ COUNCIL C3' PLANNING COMMISSION PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED ❑ PARK COMMISSION BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. ❑ OTHER PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME (please print) ADDRESS NAME OR NUMBER 1. I'c k i.3 G)? —e t f 02.- 2. A yS / - Ave- / n 3. /cei-4 / �v�--f t y vie 1 - s ' o c d/,4 (( _ 4. 1+I 1AKi r23 A- A6OR 5'7r. p'Z -2.e0 5. rQ cA 'ear 02 2 7? g 6. 4,3 - "ice *Q2 277 t 7. (, °t± ,7 `. L- W.� t A- 'L-. ceNt. �/?s is: 8. X6vP24- 6-/Ai N/ I �+�f JZ� 9. J � CHAvSJDX' l0FORrit 6/2 2S2-cion 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. X:\Data\Adminisvative Support\(Forms-Old)\FORMS\PUBLIC.ATT MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. ROLL The Commission met on the above mentioned date with the following members present: Chair Sandra Smith, Commissioners David Rahn, Cynthia Bremer, Janice Berg, J. Mark Fritzler, Liz Hawn, and Jeanne Mabusth. Representing staff were Planning Director Mike Gaffron, Zoning Administrators Paul Weinberger and Wendy Bottenberg, City Planning Consultant Wally Case, Public Service Director Greg Gappa, and Recorder Kristi Anderson. Absent was Council Representative Jim White Chair Smith called the meeting to order at 6:31 P.M. CONSENT AGENDA (#1) #02-2799 TERESA KOCH, 2225 BAYVIEW PLACE, VARIANCES (#2) #02-2800 MARLYS MCCARTY,225 TONKA AVENUE,VARIANCES (#4) #02-2809 RICK AND KRISTINE STERLING, 1300 VINE PLACE, VARIANCE Item#3 Application#02-2802, Janet Gillquist, 993 Wildhurst Trail, request for Variances was removed from the Consent Agenda as the applicant has withdrawn her application. Mabusth moved, Hawn seconded,to recommend approval of Application#02-2799 Teresa Koch,2225 Bayview Place,to renew the variances to construct a new residence on the property. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. Mabusth moved, Hawn seconded, to recommend approval of Application #02-2800 Marlys McCarty,225 Tonka Avenue, granting front and rear yard setback variances as well as lot area and width variances to construct a new residence on the lot. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0. Mabusth moved, Hawn seconded, to recommend approval of Application #02-2809 Rick and Kristine Sterling, 1300 Vine Place, granting approval of the average lakeshore setback variance to construct a 2' X 10' addition and to replace the existing lakeside deck. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0. PAGE 1 of 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. OLD BUSINESS (#5) #02-2668 MANLEY BROS. CONSTRUCTION, 1973 FAGERNESS POINT ROAD, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCES Weinberger requested that this application be tabled until outstanding issues could be resolved. Hawn moved, Smith seconded, to table Application #02-2668, Manley Bros. Construction, 1973 Fagerness Point Road, Conditional Use Permit and Variances. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0. (#6) #02-2776 HENNEPIN COUNTY,3880 SHORELINE DRIVE,RENEWAL VARIANCES Weinberger requested the Commission return to this item later in the meeting, as the Hennepin County representative was not present. (#7) #02-2786 JOHN R. JONES,3490 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, VARIANCES The applicant had not yet arrived; therefore, Weinberger suggested returning to this item as well. NEW BUSINESS (#8)#02-2791 DAVID AND JODI RAHN, 1385 REST POINT ROAD,VARIANCES 6:37 p.m. - 7:00 p.m. David Rahn, Applicant, was present. Weinberger explained that the applicants had applied for variances to permit construction of a 24' X 24' attached garage and walkway that would connect the new garage to the existing house. The garage is proposed to have a second story"bonus room" including adding two dormer windows on the north side of the existing roof. The new additions require variances to permit new structure and hardcover within 75' of the lakeshore. Weinberger pointed out that in order to accommodate the new hardcover, a sidewalk between the existing garage and house would be removed along with the driveway access to the garage. Previous variances#2248 (1997) were approved to permit additions to the existing cabin 5.3' to the property line. Weinberger maintained that hardcover variances were allowed since the entire cabin and additions were located within the 75' setback and a finding made at that time indicated PAGE 2 of 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2791 DAVID AND JODI RAHN, Continued) that a large portion of the center of the property was located within the floodplain. Variance #2390 (1998) approved allowing additional hardcover on the property to construct a 20'X20' detached garage at street level. At that time, Weinberger indicated that the Council had felt the applicant should have considered the issue of a garage in 1997. Later in October 1998, Jim Hafner, District Technician for the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, visited the site and made a finding that the area on the property below 931.5' elevation was, in fact, not directly connected to the 100-year floodplain of Lake Minnetonka after all. Weinberger shared other approvals allowed in the Rest Point Road neighborhood. He stated that staff recommended the proposed lot coverage be limited to 15% of the lot area, which, based on new calculations lot area is at 14.8%,thus not requiring a lot coverage variance after all. Staff also agreed that the existing garage is not the safest access to the property. Variances are still needed, however, to allow the connection between the house and new garage and additional hardcover. Weinberger questioned if the determination that the area below 931.5' elevation as not part of the 100-year flood elevation of Lake Minnetonka, changes how the Planning Commission considers new development on this property. There were no public comments. Smith questioned Rahn whether the designation as a flood plain back in 1997 affected their decision to develop the property the way they did and how the original plans might have been different if that determination had never been made. Rahn stated that in 1997, he did not wish to move the structure due to the floodplain and mitigate for it. If he had known it were not a floodplain, he stated that he could have seen moving the home back 20' from lakeside and having an attached garage. In hindsight, Rahn indicated that had he looked at the designation further and pursued other options things would be different. Smith inquired what would make up the second story shown on the overhead. Rahn indicated that the bonus room located above the garage, has no designated use as of yet, while a hallway adjoins it to the rest of the house. Smith further questioned how the property had evolved from originally having no garage to now PAGE 3 of 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2791 DAVID AND JODI RAHN, Continued) possessing two proposed garages. She asked why no garage had been considered in 1997. Rahn maintained that the original design would have been different from the start, if he had not been limited by the floodplain. He likely would have proposed an attached garage. Rahn stated that based on these issues at the outset, they were not in any hurry to construct a garage, nor did they have any idea where it might fit best, later on they built the detached garage. Rahn reiterated that if they remove the steps, walkway and driveway to the existing garage, they lose 160' in hardcover. He did request keeping a landing and 3' apron along the garage for water diversion. Smith asked if the removal of the steps, driveway, and walkway were reflected in the calculations. Weinberger noted that they had been taken into account. Present during both 1997 and 1998, Hawn stated that this lot could support no more hardcover, however, based on the redefinition of the floodplain, she has since reconsidered her position. The structural coverage issue has been eliminated, the rest of the new construction falls within the 75- 250' setback with hardcover not exceeding 25%, under these circumstances she indicated that she could approve the application. Hawn added that she would never like to see this property come before the Commission ever again. Rahn stated that he wasn't aware there were limits on the number of variances a property is granted. He pointed out that neighbors have been granted 31%hardcover variances in the area, whereas, he has only a 23%hardcover ratio. Mabusth stated that she concurred with Hawn's opinion. Smith took a moment to caution others not to be in too great a hurry to develop property without examining all of their options. Had the applicant resolved the floodplain issue at the time, he would not be here this evening, the Commission would not be looking at three structures, he could have had his attached garage as proposed, and pulled back the home a little bit to enjoy more of the lakeshore, but here we are. Mabusth supported the application, adding that the applicant has and will have to live with the imposed limitations. He could have enjoyed more home and lakeshore if these issues had been resolved upfront. PAGE 4 of 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2791 DAVID AND JODI RAHN, Continued) Hawn moved, Mabusth seconded, to recommend approval of Application #02-2791, David and Jodi Rahn, 1385 Rest Point Road, approving a hardcover variance within the 0-75' setback and to permit new structure within the 0-75' setback, subject to the removal of the existing steps,walkway, and driveway. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0, Rahn abstaining. OLD BUSINESS, Continued (#6) #02-2776 HENNEPIN COUNTY, 3880 SHORELINE DRIVE, RENEWAL VARIANCES 7:01 p.m.- 7:19 p.m. Lazio Philip, Architect representing Hennepin County, was present. Weinberger reported that Hennepin County has applied to renew variances to permit construction of a 7,200 s.f., three bay salt and sand storage building on the property and to renew a conditional use permit to permit construction of a stormwater pond on the property. The original approved 2000 site plan showed the storage building 50' from the north property line and 125' from the east property line. Weinberger explained that the revised site plan has relocated the building closer to the property lines than previously approved. The new plan shows the building 27' from the north line and 67' from the east property line. Weinberger stated that the required setback to the rear property line for a building is 30'. The 27' setback requires a variance. Approval of the site plan as a renewal will require the site plan to be amended to meet the previously approved setbacks. In addition, Weinberger noted that the new building location would not reduce hardcover as previously approved. The facility is mainly used for winter road maintenance, with a coverage area for this facility primarily being County Road 15 between Mound and Highway 12 and County Road 19 from Orono to Excelsior. A County Highway maintenance facility since 1962,the DNR also makes use of the property for storage of milfoil harvesters etc. Weinberger stated that staff recommends approval of the renewal variances subject to the conditions as noted in Resolution No. 4485 and requires the building to meet the setbacks as approved in 2000. Lazio Philip, an independent contractor representing Hennepin County, stated that the County is willing to comply with the 2000 requirements and conditions. There were no public comments. PAGE 5 of 36 , MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2776 HENNEPIN COUNTY, Continued) Smith pointed out that in 2000 the Planning Commission did not recommend approval; however the City Council approved the Resolution for Hennepin County. Mabusth asked what the concerns of the Commission were. Smith indicated that it was an oversized structure, which the Commission feared could spur the expansion of the operation at that site. Hawn added that there was concern with regard to this being the right spot for a facility of this nature. Located near the Lake and wetland, the proximity issue was raised with regard to the salt and sand near these precious natural resources. Mabusth inquired about the proposed retention pond being constructed to mitigate and filter the runoff before it meets the wetland or lake. Weinberger stated that the retention pond is being designed to treat the entire site,plus the chiropractic clinic next door. Philip maintained that the new building will be taking the place of the existing structure and it is less likely any leaching will occur. Mabusth voiced her support for the renewal of the original site plan and asked if this impacts the additional storage requirements of the facility. Weinberger noted that the storage will be moved to the opposite side. Philip pointed out that some retaining walls may still fall within the 250' setback. Rahn questioned altogether the rationale for approving a nonconforming use. They have proposed new footage, an expansion of a nonconforming use, which is in contradiction to all Commission findings. Weinberger stated that based on the City Council Findings of Fact, the proposed building will actually have less impact on the surrounding residential properties because the number of salt and sand deliveries to the site would be reduced by approximately 60 trips annually. With the enclosed building, the County can stockpile the mix and accept deliveries during daytime hours. Rahn asked if this could lead to expanded service sites. PAGE 6 of 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2776,HENNEPIN COUNTY, Continued) Weinberger reiterated that the County has no intention to expand the service area being County Road 15 between Mound and Highway 12 and County Road 19 from Orono to Excelsior. The County has been there since 1962 and want to keep this site to ensure easier access to the areas of Highway 15 and County Road 19. Mabusth questioned whether the City conditioned the retention pond to be in at a certain time. She felt that to be an important ingredient of the application, which should be finished before occupation of the new building, takes place. Philip stated that ponding is planned to be completed along with construction. Fritzler questioned how the pond would cover the entire site when it is located at the northeast corner. Would there be internal drainage that occurs to avoid building runoff draining into the wetland. Weinberger pointed out that the proposed storm sewers will redirect the runoff flow to the pond. Fritzler reminded the Commission that, currently, the two wetlands receive everything from the two lots and should be cleaned up with the new construction. Weinberger promised to double check that the storm water sewer service would redirect the drainage as discussed. Philip stated that, to his knowledge,the design and grading that will occur will redirect everything so that it heads to the pond. Mabusth moved, Smith seconded, to approve Application #02-02-2776, Hennepin County, 3880 Shoreline Drive,the renewal application for a Conditional Use Permit, the construction of an oversized accessory structure, and construction of a stormwater management pond on the property, subject to the findings and conditions set forth in the previous resolution approving this application in June of 2000. Furthermore, approval of this application will be based on the fact that all drainage from the site will drain to the new retention pond and that existing wetlands, two within close proximity to the site, be cleaned out. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 1, Hawn opposed. Hawn stated that she objects to the proposed geographic location for this application. PAGE 7 of 36 1 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#7) #02-2786 JOHN R. JONES,3490 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, VARIANCES 7:20 p.m. - 7:25 p.m. John R. Jones and Charlotte Lipa, Applicants, were present. Weinberger indicated that the applicant had dropped off revised plans earlier that day addressing a 2 1/2 story building. Based on the sketches Mr. Jones provided, they had reduced the size of the 1/2 story and revised the building height to meet the requirements as laid out at the June 17, 2002 Planning Commission Meeting. Having met the lot coverage requirements, Weinberger noted that the only issue that remained was the side yard setbacks. Approximately 10 feet from either side, Weinberger suggested reducing the eaves to 1 1/2 feet. Additional variances include a variance to allow new construction, lot width, and lot area allowing 37% hardcover. Weinberger pointed out that the applicant had addressed the concerns from the last meeting while maximizing his use. Mr. Jones had nothing to add. There were no public comments. Smith complimented Mr. Jones on addressing the previous concerns. Bremer stated that he had done a good job working with staff to come to an acceptable design. Jones added that the best piece of advice the Commission gave him was to fire his previous architect. Fritzler asked if Mr. Jones would revise the eaves. Mr. Jones agreed. Smith moved, Bremer seconded,to recommend approval of Application#02-2786,John R. Jones,3490 North Shore Drive, granting variances for lot width, lot area, and hardcover for construction of a new home on this property. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0. NEW BUSINESS, Continued (#9) #02-2797 JIM MURPHY AND SANDRA SMITH,30 ORONO ORCHARD ROAD, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 7:26 p.m. - 7:50 p.m. Jim Murphy and Sandra Smith, Applicants, were present. PAGE 8 of 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2797 JAMES MURPHY AND SANDRA SMITH,Continued) Weinberger explained that the applicants had made a request for a conditional use permit to allow an additional horse on the property, making a total of three horses on the property. The property is located in the RR-1B zoning district where horses are a permitted accessory use. The Smith/Murphy property is approximately 3.6 acres, where 5 acres is required to permit 3 horses as an accessory use on the property. Since the Smith/Murphy horses do not require pasture land for feed purposes, Council has the discretion to reduce the required pasture acreage. Weinberger pointed out that horses have been kept on this property since the barn was erected 60+years ago. Weinberger added that, regardless of the size of the pasture, a proper manure management program is vital to the protection of nearby wetlands and to eliminate odors. In 1997 the applicants contacted the University of Minnesota Extension Service to conduct a site visit to determine if any potential pollution impacts were present on the property. It was the opinion of Jeremy Geske, Extension Educator, specializing in Livestock Systems due to the size of the operation and the way it is managed that any impact to the wetland from runoff from the site is extremely minor. Weinberger stated that staff recommends approval of the application to permit three horses on the property per the request in the applicant's letter of application. One additional horse would not be significant change to the character of the property and the applicants own the property that would be subject to the most impact. He suggested that the Planning Commission also provide conditions that will ensure the impact of three horses will not change how the property is used and consider a sunset date allowing three horses on the property. Weinberger acknowledged the public comments memo submitting neighbors opinions for consideration. Hawn questioned the manure management program used on the property. Smith stated that Jeremy Geske, the University of Minnesota extension educator,reviewed their compost and management plan, including the border composting, and felt it was adequate. Murphy stated that the border composting provides a natural buffer for runoff By pushing the manure under the fence and managing the removal themselves by grading the area every spring or giving the manure to local landscapers, they have successfully been managing the waste. Having never considered adding additional horses to the property, Smith stated that the two they own are elderly and chronically lame. She indicated that her father had offered a younger four year old for them to train and keep. Murphy stated that it is a timing issue for them, there is no way to predict how long the 26 year PAGE 9 of 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2797 JAMES MURPHY AND SANDRA SMITH, Continued) old will last, yet alone the lame 18 year old. He added that adding the four year old to their stable provides them an opportunity to start anew. Hawn suggested the Commission consider a time limit which might contemplate the demise of the elder horses and allow for three currently. Smith asked if they would need to return to two horses at that time. Hawn asked if ten years seemed a reasonable time line allowing three horses. Smith stated that they could accept ten years if the Commission chose this limit, however, they could be returning at that time for additional discussion. Bremer questioned the average life expectancy of a horse Hawn called for public comment. Dave Struyk, the neighbor contiguous to the Smith/Murphy site, stated that he has shared a driveway with the applicants since 1979, and there has always been horses there even prior to the Smith/Murphy's. He indicated that he and his family welcome the horses and enjoy them. With regard to the odor issue raised by a different neighbor, Mr. Struyk stated that he has never noticed any odor problem coming or going daily down the drive. Three horses are in keeping with the community. Jonathon Tomhave, 1200 Orono Oaks Drive, stated that he supports the addition of a third horse. He maintained that the odor is virtually nonexistent, even as he heads to his mailbox daily it is not noticeable. He added a general comment, stating how important it is since 9/11/01 to encourage community and support one another. Bremer suggested, rather than speculating on the average life expectancy of a horse, the Commission make it contingent on the death of one or another of the elder horses. Smith indicated that while horses can live for 30 plus years, a 20 year old horse is considered old. Murphy noted that as their horses get older, they spend more time inside than out, which ensures the pasture and manure issues will continue to be fairly well contained. Mabusth questioned whether Smith/Murphy objected to 10 years, even though they may be back. PAGE 10 of 36 1 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#020-2797 JAMES MURPHY AND SANDRA SMITH, Continued) Murphy felt 10 years sounded reasonable, since the eldest would be 36 years old, which in itself is unlikely. He maintained that their intention was not to reconstitute the commercial barn that existed 65 years ago, they would simply like to be allowed some overlap between their older and younger horses. Hawn moved, Mabusth seconded, approving Application #02-2797, Sandra Smith and James Murphy, a Conditional Use Permit allowing the keeping of a third horse on the property where they presently keep two, subject to the following conditions, once,that they continue the manure management practices that they have already established and described, and two,the CUP for the third horse will lapse 10 years from the Council approval date. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0, Smith abstained. (#10) #02-2798 FRED SHEARER, 1405 PARK DRIVE,VARIANCES 7:51 p.m. - 8:01 p.m. Fred Shearer, Applicant, was present. Bottenberg explained that the applicant has requested side yard setback, front street setback, and hardcover in the 75-250' setback zone variances to permit construction of an attached garage to the existing residence. The addition would consist of an 11' X 23' third stall (253 s.f.) and added portion to the driveway(109 s.f.) increasing the hardcover to 31.3%, as compared to the existing 28.8%. Staff recommended approval of the side setback variance and the removal of existing hardcover in order to maintain the existing 28.8%hardcover. Shearer stated that, in reality, the existing three season porch was originally a cement slab under an existing deck, and they have not changed the hardcover by more than 4' of what was already there. He indicated that they have worked with staff to look at numerous other ways to see if they could get by with a detached garage, however, these have not been doable. He maintained that the side setback approved in 1968 was acceptable and they are trying to maintain this continuity by coming straight out. Shearer consented to removing 6' X 40' out of the driveway for more landscaping in order to reduce the hardcover by 240' which almost brings the hardcover ratio back to the original 28.8%. Hawn questioned if this removal would jeopardize safety entering and existing the driveway. Shearer stated that the driveway would be just wide enough to allow turn around room, but could PAGE 11 of 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2797 FRED SHEARER, Continued) not be any smaller. Smith asked what the percentage of hardcover would be with the removal. Bottenberg indicated 28.9%. There were no public comments. Smith asked Mr. Shearer if his neighbors had made any comments to him. Mr. Shearer stated that both neighbors had signed off on the application after speaking to them. Hawn stated that prior to his concession for hardcover, she had not seen much of a hardship, now however, she has new found support. Rahn moved,Mabusth seconded, to recommend approval of Application #02-2798, Fred Shearer, 1405 Park Drive, granting a side yard setback variance to permit a garage 9.8' from the side lot line where 10' is required, and a front yard setback variance to permit a garage 27.9' from the lot line where 30' is required, and to allow hardcover in the 75-250' zone, not to exceed 28.9%. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0. SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING -8:00 p.m. (#15)#02-2803 JEFF MARTINEAU ON BEHALF OF CHERRY STUBBS,2920 FOX STREET, CLASS II SUBDIVISION 8:02 p.m. - 8:19 p.m. Mark Gronberg, a surveyor of Gronberg and Associates representing Jeff Martineau, was present. Bottenberg reported that the applicant had applied for a preliminary plat of property located at 2920 Fox Street. The property is a 7.75 acre property to be divided to create one new building site (Lot 1), and driveway for back lot(Outlot A). The existing driveway on Fox Street will continue to be used by the house on the front lot. Bottenberg stated that the general site plan meets all requirements for a front lot/back lot subdivision. No wetland impacts are proposed and it has been determined that septic sites and both primary and secondary drainfield sites meet all City and State standards. PAGE 12 of 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2803 JEFF MARTINEAU ON BEHALF OF CHERRY STUBBS, Continued) While the existing residence on Lot 2 does not meet the side yard setback from Outlot A, Bottenberg stated that, at this point, it has not been determined if the structure will remain or be removed. Staff recommended approval of the preliminary plat subject to the six conditions outlined on page 3 of the zoning administrator's report dated July 11, 2002. Bottenberg added that the applicant has agreed to comply with all covenants. There were no public comments. Hawn stated that she would like closure that the existing outbuildings would be removed. Mabusth agreed, stating that at minimum the buildings on the lot line would be removed. She questioned who owned the structure to the east. Gronberg stated that, to his knowledge,the shed belonged to the adjoining property owner. He felt all of the out buildings would come down with the exception of the house and garage that might come down at some other time. He suggested that the applicant could come forward to the Council with some sort of timeline of when they would be removed. Hawn believed they would need to be removed prior to anyone building on the second lot. Gronberg noted that a single buyer may purchase both properties and live in the house for awhile as they build a new home on the back lot. Mabusth asked who was living on the property. Gronberg believed that Cherry Stubbs was the only resident, and was moving out. He inquired whether outlot A could be converted to lot 1 if they didn't want to share a driveway. Weinberger acknowledged that the house is recorded at a 50' setback to the platted outlot. Gaffron noted not under current code. Mabusth asked if the outlot stays in a shared ownership. Gaffron stated that outlot A can stay in common ownership, even if the current owner combined the two lots, the outlot would still function as the corridor requiring a 50' setback for new PAGE 13 of 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2803 JEFF MARTINEAU ON BEHALF OF CHERRY STUBBS, Continued) construction. Gaffron recommended that the outbuildings on lot 1 be removed at the time the subdivision is approved because that lot then becomes a lot without a principal structure, and shouldn't have any accessory structures. The accessory buildings on outlot A should also be removed at that point, and a small shed on lot 2 should be considered for removal. The existing house, garage, and large shed in the northwest quadrant of the property could remain for the time being and have no impact on the next lot. Smith asked if this would be agreeable to the applicant. Gronberg stated that he had been given the impression that some negotiation is going on with buyers or a single buyer, who would live in the existing house until the new residence would be built. Gronberg felt the existing house would not be a permanent structure, but should be allowed to remain while they are building. Berg stated that the Commission would like the other accessory structures to be removed with the subdivision. Mabusth asked if there was an engineer's report to review. Weinberger stated that there was not one available yet. Smith inquired whether this should hold up the process. Weinberger stated that it should not hold up the process, but should certainly be available to Council. Smith reiterated that the direction the Commission is taking is for removal of the smaller sheds and accessory structures, while leaving the existing house, garage, and large shed for now. Fritzler asked if the development does separate the two pieces, does the existing driveway for lot 2 turn over to outlot. Smith stated that if the existing house is still being used at this point, access will get fairly difficult. Gronberg stated that the residents would use the existing driveway to access the existing house. Mabusth maintained that they need to set a deadline for when it has to be removed. PAGE 14 of 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2803 JEFF MARTINEAU ON BEHALF OF CHERRY STUBBS, Continued) Gaffron stated that, he believed,the code does not force or require in a front/back lot subdivision that both accesses come off the outlot and the existing driveway does not need to come off the front lot. Gaffron pointed out that, if this is the case, the County may have an issue with having two accesses. He suggested contacting Hennepin County public works department and the City Engineer. Gronberg asked if the applicant could keep this option open. Smith questioned whether the existing driveway could stay there forever. Berg stated that the County has the final say so. Rahn asked if the two properties are sold to two owners when the accessory structures will be required to be removed. This would be an undue burden on those owner. Smith indicated the removals would be a condition of the subdivision. Hawn moved, Smith seconded, to approve Application#02-2803,Jeff Martineau on behalf of Cherry Stubbs,2920 Fox Street, granting the preliminary plat subject to the condition that the City Engineer's report be received by Council at the time it goes to Council, and outlot A be platted subject to the removal of all accessory structures other than the existing house, garage, and large shed at the time of subdivision. Mabusth questioned the need to resolve with the County the issue over two accesses. Smith added that an advisory to the Council be given that this is a County decision that will likely be resolved at the time of redevelopment of the property. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0 (#11) #02-2801 KATHY MELIN,3309 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD,VARIANCES 8:20 p.m. - 8:43 p.m. Kathy Melin and Robert Koelfgen, Applicant and Metro Handy Man, were present. Weinberger stated that the applicant has requested variances to permit construction of a 12' X 24' three season porch on the lakeside of the existing residence. Variances required for the construction are, a front yard setback, side yard setback, structure within 75' of the lakeshore, PAGE 15 of 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2801 KATHY MELIN, Continued) increased hardcover in the 0-75' setback, lot coverage by structure, and total encroachment of 8' into the average lakeshore setback. With regard to hardship, Weinberger noted that the applicant had stated that the house is located between the lake and a hill. Weinberger indicated that there are six variances being proposed for this site which bring into question,when is a property considered"fully developed". A variance to permit lot coverage beyond 1,500 s.f. on this property would be inconsistent with other recent actions along Crystal Bay Road. There have been two recent variance approvals that were for complete rebuilds, not an addition as in the case of this application. Staff recommends denial of the application due to the entire addition being located within the 75' of the lakeshore. The addition could not be done without the need for variances. The property has a total of 1,397 s.f. of structure. Due to the amount of hardcover and building already within 75' of the lakeshore a variance to allow additional hardcover or structure is not warranted. Koelfgen stated that he had just gotten the setback calculations that afternoon and had insufficient time to review them. He felt the surveyors hadn't shown the deck with a 10' setback from the side as he had in the original plan. Koelfgen added that he was unaware they were adjacent to and infringing upon the Dakota Trail ROW stating that they were looking for some way to comply with at least some of the variances. Rahn stated that it would be tough to come off the front of the home with an addition that doesn't exceed the 1,500 s.f allowance and require encroaching into the 75' setback. He stated that he would have big problems with these two issues. Koelfgen pointed out that variances had been granted for construction in 1996 and 1997. Weinberger maintained that the variances he referred to were for new construction with different allowances, in fact, the home at 3375 Crystal Bay Road was required to reduce its structural coverage to 1,500 from the original 2,000. While she recognized the desire for enclosed outdoor life, Smith asked what could be given up to accomplish this requiring fewer variances. She suggested removal of the other porches or enclosing them. Melin stated that she would be willing to remove all of the other decks and sheds on the residence in exchange for addition of this one. PAGE 16 of 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2801 KATHY MELIN, Continued) Mabusth pointed out that the other decks are merely slabs. Bremer asked how big the house was. Weinberger stated that the residence is 1,242 s.f., not including the shed and garage. Smith inquired if the tuck under garage was included in the calculations. Weinberger noted that he merely acknowledged the door, since it is virtually under the hill. There were no public comments. Hawn stated that while the Commission's job is to give direction, she recommended the applicant come up with a design that keeps to the 1,500 s.f. structural coverage and 75' setback. She stated that the applicant has a very tough road ahead and needs to look closely at the codes and work with staff on the proposal. She asked if the Commission should table the application. Melin asked if she were willing to remove everything in order to meet the 1,500 s.f, could she have her porch. Berg suggested the applicant talk further with staff and come back with a new plan. Bremer inquired if wrapping the deck would be workable. Mabusth indicated that by doing so they would be encroaching further into the 75' setback, and suggested going to the east side in order to pull the addition out of the average lakeshore setback. Melin stated that neither of her neighbors had complained about the addition protruding further than their residences. Smith maintained that the average lakeshore setback ensures that individuals don't encroach on each others views. Weinberger pointed out that, typically, when an applicant is well over the amount of hardcover allowed the Commission looks for ways to remove excess hardcover. He questioned whether the old garage's existing driveway could be removed, however, maintained that this could not be done without restricting access to the home. Smith asked the applicant if a motion should be made to table the request. PAGE 17 of 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2801 KATHY MELIN, Continued) Melin agreed. Smith moved,Mabusth seconded, to table Application #02-2801, Kathy Melin,3309 Crystal Bay Road, to allow the applicant time to explore other options for their proposed porch. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0. (Recess taken from 8:43 p.m. - 8:53 p.m.) SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING - 8:30 P.M. (#16) #02-2789 DAHLSTROM DEVELOPMENT LLC, 2550 WEST WAYZATA BOULEVARD, PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW, GENERAL CONCEPT PLAN APPROVAL AND REZONING FROM RR-1B SINGLE FAMILY RURAL RESIDENTIAL TO RPUD RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 8:54 p.m. - 10:29 p.m. Steve Johnston, Carolyn Krall, and Kendra Lindahl of Landform Designs, and the applicant Mr. Dahlstrom, were present. Gaffron reported that the Applicants had submitted a revised proposal to develop portions of this 51- acre site via the Planned Unit Development process. Proposed uses include a mixture of residential housing types to be located north of Kelley Parkway,including 59 rambler townhomes,43 two-story townhomes, and 66 lofts(condominium units). The proposal would create two commercial outlots south of Kelley Parkway for future development. Gaffron stated that the Planning Commission met with the City Council and representatives for the developer last week in a joint work session to familiarize themselves with the new proposal. The required approvals include: Proposed rezoning of the residential area north of Kelley Parkway to RPUD. PUD General Concept Plan Approval is the first stage of the two-stage PUD review process in which the Planning Commission and City Council review all conceptual aspects of the proposed development. Finally, the PUD Development Plan Approval will be sought as the final stage in which the developer will provide detailed plans for implementation of the approved General Concept Plan, as well as preliminary and final plat documents. As part of the Concept Plan Review phase, Gaffron stated that the Planning Commission should focus on both general and detail aspects of the development plan. By identifying issues and concerns, and defining both positive and negative aspects related to the Concept Plan, the Commission's goal should be to provide specific direction to the applicant as to how resolve the PAGE 18 of 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2789 DAHLSTROM DEVELOPMENT, Continued) issues. Such direction could result in one of two actions;revision and submittal of the concept plan to reflect all required changes or insertion of the direction into the concept plan approval resolution as a condition to be met before the City will grant final development plan approval. Gaffron pointed out that some difference of opinion has occurred between staff and the applicant's consultants regarding at what level of the review process concept plan approval should be granted. This is in part due to conflicting wording and intent between the PUD and RPUD ordinances. The applicant's consultants have to some extent treated the concept plan approval as equivalent to the sketch plan stage,whereby the City has merely been providing direction thus far. The City,in fact, is reluctant to grant concept plan approval without having all the details worked out, in turn the developer is hesitant to commit his resources to providing great detail without some expectation that the project will be approved. Gaffron encouraged the Commission to include discussion with regard to the proposed land use and density. The density guidelines for the area north of Kelley Parkway were refined as part of the 2000-2020 CMP update,resulting in a density standard of 3-6 units per dry buildable acre,without limitation on the number of units per building allowed in this area. Therefore, Gaffron noted that the developer has a reasonable expectation based on the comp plan, that a proposed development with a density of 3-6 units per acre will be approved. Because this is PUD and rezoning request,the Commission has the ability to determine whether the density is appropriate in the context of the type of the mix of the various dwelling units, as well as, their mass and layout and site circulation etc. Due to the RPUD standards, Gaffron pointed out that the district allows higher densities than contemplated in the CMP, only in areas "currently zoned and guided for commercial use". With regard to the use of Kelley Parkway for Density credit, Gaffron noted that the applicant's proposal is at a density of 6.0 units per dry buildable acre if the northerly half of Kelley Parkway right-of-way (not including the portion within the MnDOT pond) is allowed for density credit. Gaffron stated that he had no problem with offering the credit. He added that the current proposal for 168 residential units, plus the two commercial outlots, will fall within the density range anticipated by the 2000-2020 CMP. In terms of location for Kelley Parkway, which is the other significant initial starting point for discussion,Gaffron referred to two concept plans for the areas north and south,between Willow and Old Crystal Bay Road, set up as a guidelines for discussion. Studies A and D became the City's standard discussion guide for developers inquiring about the property, but did not become part of the CMP. Gaffron pointed out that the applicants have suggested that the routing of Kelley Parkway in their revised Concept Plan"follows your comprehensive plan". Gaffron noted PAGE 19 of 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2789 DAHLSTROM DEVELOPMENT, Continued) that this is not accurate,as the CMP does not define routing for Kelley Parkway but merely indicates it will be "300-500 feet north of Highway 12". Gaffron suggested additional discussion addressing staff's concern about the applicants' proposal to locate a segment of Kelley Parkway within the existing MnDOT stormwater pond right-of-way take place, never suggested as a feasible or preferred configuration. Gaffron stated that Public Service Director Greg Gappa discussed this with Ben Timerson of MnDOT,who indicated that while such a reconveyance to the City would be feasible, it would not be a priority and would likely take 6 months to a year to process. Staff believed it would not be in the City's best interest to pursue such a request on behalf of the applicants. While City support and partnering in gaining approval for the use and expansion of the MnDOT pond right-of-way for regional stormwater purposes is one thing, Gaffron maintained pursuing a swap for road purposes is quite another and does not rise to the same level of importance. The City is currently working closely with MnDOT to ensure that the Highway 12 project proceeds as smoothly as possible, whereas MnDOT does not have the resources to deal efficiently with requests such as this. Gaffron suggested that the Planning Commission make a recommendation,as to whether the applicant and City should pursue use of the MnDOT pond area for Kelley Parkway. Gaffron supplied the Commission with a punchlist of 8 various topics along with an outline of the site plan elements that should be considered prior to making a recommendation to Council on the Concept Plan. Gaffron indicated that the Planning Commission should first concentrate on whether this concept plan generally achieves the purposes of the RPUD District. Next, consider whether the mix and spatial relationships of the various unit types within the development and in relation to each other as well as the surrounding uses, is appropriate. He added that discussion whether the lack of a defined proposal for the use of the outlots will cause potential issues in terms of whether the outlots can be used for their intended purpose is warranted. The issues regarding location of Kelley Parkway in the MnDOT pond r.o.w.also seems to be a critical factor to staff in determining whether the entire concept plan can move forward. Smith invited Steve Johnston, of Landform Designs, to make a brief presentation in order to familiarize the public with the proposal. Following the presentation, Smith asked that public comment be made and discussion among the Commissioners be limited to approximately an hour, specifically addressing the punchlist provided by staff.. Mr.Johnston shared schematic drawings of the units in order to provide the Commission with a feel for the scale and mass of the units, and how they would be laid out. Johnston pointed out that PAGE 20 of 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2789 DAHLSTROM DEVELOPMENT, Continued) the two unit buildings would be approximately 50-60 ft wide.An additional drawing reflecting site amenities with trails and sidewalks and an expanded linear park was displayed as well.Based on trip calculations,Johnston pointed out that the applicant felt 110 trips daily did not warrant the need for sidewalks on the cul-de-sacs, as recommended by the planning consultant. They have proposed an open green space area with gathering spots with benches, a gazebo over a water feature, and water treatment which flows through a series of rain gardens north and south.He believed the development would not necessarily warrant a tot lot. Ms.Krall,Landform Architect,pointed out that additional green buffer space exists than is reflected in the display boards, the boards were intended to feature the larger open space and linear park system. Johnston stated that an entrance feature with a waterfall and coordinating green space for a bus stop with benches across the street was being proposed. With regard to the numbers, Johnston pointed out that public green space makes up 2 acres, the private open space equates to approximately 2.2 acres, with trails comprising another 1-2 acres, 13.7 acres or 33% of the land area is wetland, all totaled equates to 45% open space, and 55% developable land area. Johnston stated that the applicant was not at all concerned with the developable land parcels south of the development and with the City's support, they would work out the road scenario with MnDOT. Gaffron asked, if the development was forced to move,whether the applicant had an alternate plan or were prepared to lose the half circle entrance. Johnston demonstrated on a separate plan, that without the road change the development would likely lose 8 townhomes, however, it would still have an entry marked by some feature. He stated that he would be willing to take questions, but wanted to point out several elements to the Commission before he began. First, the proposed road widths were admittedly more narrow than the City had suggested, simply because the developer felt the 28' standard was too wide. He asked if a middle ground could be found. Johnston stated that they would be willing to landscape a parkway,but would like to see it 28' wide to handle the traffic volume,whereas the roads within the project are shown at 20',which meets fire code. He added that, studies have shown,narrow roads tend to keep speeds down. Curb and gutter were also proposed for all streets. There were no public comments. Smith stated that the Commission had been presented with two scenarios, along with 8 punchlist items to discuss,starting first with item 5,the proposed housing types,site layout,functionality,etc., continuing to item 7, the development of Kelley Parkway. Smith questioned if the PAGE 21 of 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2789 DAHLSTROM DEVELOPMENT, Continued) Commission felt the dwelling units,design,layout,and overall concept of housing types, at 6 units per acre, seemed to meet the City's RPUD as they would envision it. Hawn had difficulty accepting the 6 units per acre figure,even though allowed 3-6 units by code per acre, she was more interested in a lower density. She stated that she would like to see even more green space and/or wider streets or sidewalks to truly make this a "walkable" community. Furthermore, Hawn felt that the bundled parking was not sufficient to what she felt the number of housing units would require. She also had concern that cars would be piled up on Kelley Parkway waiting to get into the development. Mabusth stated that she had issue with the loft units. She questioned whether any findings to allow 3 story lofts also cited a better location other than the southwest corner that would not impact neighbors. She had concern regarding the encroachment onto the MnDOT property and asked if others found issue with that. She had no additional concerns related to item 5. Fritzler stated that,in his opinion,the houses were too tight,the streets too narrow,complaints would come from residents of the lofts about the public works site, which was there first, and finally, he saw issue with three stories in general. Smith indicated she had little more to add other than traffic concerns. She questioned how having the school nearby impacts the development. Smith wondered if direction could be given that 4-5 units per acre works better than the 6 proposed. Mabusth stated that she would not support a northeast access to the development. Rahn felt it would be derelict to allow the loft units so close to public works when we know there would be complaints. He also questioned traffic volume. Smith asked the Commission if they could suggest an alternate location for the loft units. Rahn suggested that the loft units supply the spot to reduce density. He questioned how many on site parking spots were allowed per unit. Johnston stated that there are 4 spots per unit,with additional on street parking within the bump out areas. Krall pointed out that the development has provided substantially higher parking ratios than required. PAGE 22 of 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2789 DAHLSTROM DEVELOPMENT, Continued) Rahn stated that he liked the proposed water feature. Berg stated that she understood the use of the space to the north,but believed the lofts were way too dense. She could support the site for the lofts, however, felt there were too many. With regard to traffic, Berg stated that the Commission needs to decide what Kelley Parkway will look like. Bremer stated that if there are to be lofts that is where they need to be, from an economical standpoint she could see the logic. She had less issue with the density than she did with 3 stories in general. Bremer contended that since the code allows 3-6 units per acre, the Commission should have no difficulty with 6. She complimented the applicant for their efforts in reworking the design, emphasizing the need to keep the lower price point for Orono to encourage diversity in housing. Mabusth added that the waterways are attractive and do much to enhance the plan. Bremer stated that parking to her was not a big concern and she could not support more parking at the cost of greenspace. She felt less parking might cut down on the amount of extra people Johnston pointed out that without the loft units as part of the equation, the project is at a 4 unit per acre figure. He maintained that if the City was not going to develop this property at 6 units per acre, they should not have said 3-6 units per acre in the code. With this being said, Johnston stated that the applicant would like to find a solution that is good for everyone. He added that the loft units are 60' from the property line,well within what the ordinance requires. In fact,he stated that if the City had concerns about locating housing near public works,they should have turned the building so that the ugly side faced the City Hall. With regard to a 3-story loft unit building versus a 2-story loft building, Johnston pointed out that either requires an elevator. Krall added that 3-story loft buildings were proposed because elevators will be added,and are costly. After examining the area, Krall stated that neither of the proposed 3-story loft buildings will be as high as the new senior building being built down the way. She added that the applicant does not want something obtrusive either, in fact, since they are mixing style, they propose the steps up in scale are very gradual. They have proposed continuity in their design, and have deliberately stuck to virtually the same widths throughout. Krall maintained that the lofts give people options and answer a genuine need in Orono in keeping with a high amenity design. Rahn asked why the townhomes start 1/2 story off the ground. PAGE 23 of 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2789 DAHLSTROM DEVELOPMENT, Continued) Krall stated that the townhomes are designed to be accessed by steps, unlike the loft homes,which need to be kept at or near grade. Rahn asked if the three storied start at grade. Krall indicated that the underground parking allows them to start at or just off grade. Smith inquired about possibly tilting the loft buildings slightly. Krall stated that, currently,the proposal places the driveway to the underground parking at the end near public works in order to avoid giving residents views of public works. The applicant would prefer to avoid that scenario and use a wall or fence with landscaping to further shield the facility. Johnston stated that, from an engineering standpoint,the townhomes are designed to sit up slightly so that people sitting on their porch are at eye level with those walking by. Rahn asked about the intended parking for the townhomes. Johnston stated that the applicant would like to see parallel parking on Kelley Parkway,which would allow 28' plus parking. Rahn inquired whether the street width could be expanded without undue burden. Johnston asked if it was truly necessary to widen the streets at the loss of greenspace. Krall noted that if the streets were much wider, you would encourage people to cut around each other. Johnston stated that they have tried to conserve as much green space as possible. Krall asked if a compromise of 21' to 22' would be possible, noting that 28' or more would be difficult. Weinberger stated that staff has concern about public works vehicles on the Parkway and access for bike traffic. Johnston stated that providing bituminous trail for bikes on one side and sidewalk on the other is PAGE 24 of 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2789 DAHLSTROM DEVELOPMENT, Continued) very doable. Lindahl indicated that, in order to avoid turning Kelley Parkway into a speedway, one needs to narrow the street and add landscaping and/or a canopy. While some numbers were provided at the work session, Krall stated that the traffic figures have demonstrated that approximately equal trips are taken whether it be this mixed unit development or single family residential. She added that higher senior densities provide a broader peak period as well. Mabusth asked Public Service Director Greg Gappa to comment on the Park Commissions view. Gappa noted that while the Park Commission had not commented on specifics, they would likely suggest a wider parkway since no one knows what will develop across the street. Mabusth asked if any standards exist for a parkway. Gappa stated that no standards exist, however, 41' was suggested perhaps due to the public works trucks, and because 41' is the width of existing Kelley Parkway. Gaffron stated that the CMP merely designates scenic parkways along the lakes, and the City has gone no further than naming this "parkway". The 60' corridor was platted when this area was designated for single family residential. In his thoughts, Consultant Case stated that 41' is very wide for a road that doesn't have any real standard, adding that 28' may be appropriate. He suggested that the City review the Engineer's report when available. Bremer asked if a turning lane into the development could be added. Berg reminded the Commission that there will be commercial across the street and thought needs to given into what might go there. She maintained that,likely,half of the people in the development will be coming and going during peak times. Johnston noted that even without a traffic study, it still seems likely that 41' and two lanes would be appropriate at either end of Kelley Parkway; however, he questioned the need for 41' the entire length. PAGE 25 of 36 . MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2789 DAHLSTROM DEVELOPMENT, Continued) Berg stated that consideration needs to be given to people traveling at peak times and off peak times, in order to be proactive and avoid problems. Lindahl stated that many of the issues related to traffic would likely be worked out with staff when the traffic study becomes available. As a former City Planner,to her knowledge, 28' was a pretty standard road width in most communities, and the applicant would defer to the traffic study as far as road width is concerned.They simply question whether 41'makes any sense here or if it just loses green space. Berg stated that the City needs to be proactive. There are many places where road ways have been built, and many developments, that tend to impact what's happening and the number of accidents that are happening. Berg stated that the Commission needs to be thinking about the future, not necessarily just what was being proposed here. Smith inquired when the traffic study numbers would be available. Gaffron noted that in the beginning development stage the traffic study will provide them with the appropriate details, but he encouraged the Commission not to let this holdup the concept plan. Gappa stated that the road will fall within the minimum 28' and maximum 41' range. Smith reviewed that the discussion had covered quite a few areas,including the 4 unit per acre issue, the consistency of diversity and lifestyle, 3-stories as acceptable, and the dynamics of the plan. Berg maintained that 36 units was a very large unit development,by cutting just one unit they could provide more space between property lines and everything. She stated it would be very helpful to her if they could remove three units. Krall pointed out that it is far easier to produce an even number of units within each building making a smaller size unit,than it is to remove units.Because they are built in pairs and bays,when you get to the end you can't take out three without removing six.They could change the ends of the buildings to 2-stories be removing two units on the top floor. Berg stated this would not change unit size floor to floor. She assumed most plans would accommodate removing units. Krall suggested that they drop the end to two stories to soften the look of this building. Similar to PAGE 26 of 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2789 DAHLSTROM DEVELOPMENT, Continued) the senior building that tried to do the same thing. Berg asked they not compare themselves to the other development. Krall indicated that because it is currently under construction it is shaping peoples image of what this could be. Johnston stated that in order to cut down on the complaints,a disclosure statement could be provided for renters of the lofts stating that they are aware they are near public works. These end units would also be subject to thicker walls and triple glazing to reduce disturbance. Fritzler suggested placing the stairways or offices at the end near public works versus rental units. Krall agreed that would be done to the extent possible. Gaffron noted that the Commission hadn't discussed separation yet. Mabusth asked for Planning Consultant Case's opinion. Case stated that while 10' setback or separation is not unusual in a village context,the Commission needs to realize that they have 2 1/2 story buildings approximately 28' tall with a separation of 10'. In the revised plan most buildings are flat side to flat side,but it can depend on the architecture. As one walks by a ten foot setback can feel like a significant setback,but from a roadway,the setback can look altogether different. Krall added that landscaping can also effect that dramatically. Johnston pointed out that, in reality, most of the setbacks are 15'. Based on how some of the buildings are angled, Johnston noted that at one end there might be 15' separation,while there is a separation of 22' or more at the other. He indicated that they are looking for the flexibility to go down to 10', otherwise the corners can get tight, and other ends with setbacks of 60'. Krall observed that, in their experience,the side yards are not used extensively. They provide nice separation and greenspace but for the most part people don't use those narrow yards but they do provide screening from the next unit over. For the sake of trying to wrap up the discussion for the evening,Johnston stated that,on a plan,they will provide the Commission with what the proposed exact separations are for consideration PAGE 27 of 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2789 DAHLSTROM DEVELOPMENT, Continued) during their next discussion. Case asked if any circulation would be provided from the parking side to the other. Krall stated that there will be wider spaces provided to access the front and back. As a result of the last discussion,they added those areas. Smith stated that they had covered many items,including proposed housing and how it relates to the RPUD, they touched on Kelley Parkway and transportation, and access in and out as it relates to parking. Many items they had not covered need to be discussed and she asked Gaffron if there was anything that should be covered yet that evening to provide direction to the applicant. Gaffron suggested they either spend another hour wrapping up discussion or scheduling a follow-up meeting for another time. Bremer suggested a second meeting soon. Johnston concurred, stating that they have a timeline they are trying to meet and would like to continue discussion soon. It was agreed that discussion of this item would be continued to a meeting which would take place on Wednesday, July 17, 2002 at 5:30 P.M. Mabusth asked when the wetland delineation report would be ready for review. Johnston stated that the study was concluded and he awaits the paperwork. Gaffron encouraged the Commission that, if they had enough detail to grant concept plan approval on Wednesday night, to do so. (#12)#02-2804 PHILIP AND CONSTANCE MARTIN,1230 ARBOR STREET,VARIANCES 10:29 p.m. - 10:49 p.m. Philip Martin, Applicant, was present. Bottenberg reported that the applicants have requested front yard and side yard setback variances to construct a front porch and an attached garage to the existing residence. The existing single car garage will be converted to living space, the existing driveway would be removed, and a new PAGE 28 of 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2804 PHILIP AND CONSTANCE MARTIN, Continued) one will be located in from the new garage. While located within the two acre zoning district,Bottenberg stated that the neighborhood is more in character with half acre zoning standards. If half acre zoning standards were applied to this property the existing residence would meet the 30'required front setback. The proposed front porch and the front of the proposed garage would encroach 4' into the front yard setback. The side of the proposed garage would meet the required 10' side yard setback. With regard to the history of Arbor Street,Bottenberg pointed out that most of the properties in the area are half acre lots and the property to the south has been vacant for many years. Bottenberg maintained that if the Planning Commission concludes that the addition as proposed would be in character with the neighborhood,and not detrimental to the neighborhood,and adequate hardships are present, then a recommendation for approval would be appropriate. Mr. Martin stated that his only hardship is that he has no character out front,most of his neighbors have front porches out front,and his has absolutely nothing. While the average setback is 40',what he has proposed does not change the character of the street,in fact,the neighbors have indicated their support. From a functional hardship,Martin stated that there is no landing to the front of his home,you enter directly into the house. There were no public comments. Rahn asked if with the removal of the existing driveway,the old garage would turn into living space. Martin stated that the driveway is not paved, in an effort to reduce hardcover. Smith inquired about the vacant lot. Martin indicated that the owner lives across the street and stated they do not object to his proposal. Smith asked if, in the future, someone wants to build on that site would the proposed garage and porch be to close to the lot line. PAGE 29 of 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2804 PHILIP AND CONSTANCE MARTIN, Continued) Rahn asked why the residents along Arbor are zoned for 2 acre lots when that is clearly not the case. Bremer stated that she was in support of the proposal and believed it to be a big improvement. Berg moved,Smith seconded,to approve Application#02-2804,Philip and Constance Martin, 1230 Arbor Street,granting variances for front yard setback and side yard setback and that the existing garage door and driveway be removed and exterior wall replacement be done. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#13) #02-2805 CARSON ERICKSON,3415 EASTLAKE STREET, VARIANCES 10:50 p.m. - 11:20 p.m. Bruce Hellier, architect from Hellier Homes and Additions, was present. Bottenberg explained that the applicant has worked very hard with staff to best meet city ordinances and construct a new house on the property. The latest plan before the Commission just completed is Plan 3, therefore a site plan and not a survey accompany it this time around. Bottenberg reported that the applicant has requested variances to permit removal of the existing house and construction of a new house. The new home would be a two story,four bedroom home, with a two stall tuck under style garage. Due to the small size of the lot and zoning standards, it is not possible to rebuild on the property without requiring variances. The requested variances include: lot area and lot width,hardcover and structure within 75' in excess of 25%, and a variance to allow encroachment into the 50' front yard setback. While Eastlake Street is zoned LR-1A (2 acre), Bottenberg pointed out that most of the properties are.11 or.12 of an acre. After researching Eastlake Street,staff found four residents where variances have been granted. Recapping, the main hardships are that the lot is extremely undersized for the zoning district and 75% of the property is within 75' of the 929.4' water level. Staff recommends approval of the required variances to construct a new single family residence on the property. Bottenberg submitted both a signed letter of support from four neighbors and one letter from the neighbor at 3403 Eastlake Street objecting to the application on the grounds it is too large and PAGE 30 of 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2805 CARSON ERICKSON, Continued) out of character for the area. There were no public comments. Mabusth questioned how they could have held true to the side yard setbacks. Hellier indicated that their goal was to be in compliance with one or two codes if possible. Mabusth questioned the 9' setback from the street and 37' setback from the creek, as well as, the very large 600 s.f. deck. Rahn had concern with the lack of allowable parking in the driveway. Mabusth suggested expanding the design further sideways in order to obtain more room by the road and in the front. She felt she could support side yard setback variances in order to gain additional room near the road. Bremer stated that she had less concern about being close to the road than she did close to the lake. With regard to neighboring residences, the proposed home seemed to her to be similar in size to 3407 or 3465. Hellier stated that 3465 was a larger home,and while designing this site they chose to stick with the bungalow style home design currently seen in the area. Bremer noted that the structural coverage was under 15%. Rahn stated that the deck was much too massive for the home at 15X40 = 600 s.f., he would be inclined to see something more reasonable. Hellier indicated that he knew he had an additional 2500 s.f. to use up and chose to do so with the deck. Bremer asked whether the Commission had a problem with the proposal as long as the applicant reduced the deck. Hawn stated that she had difficulty accepting the limited driveway space. Bremer suggested that the deck span the 30' width of the bank of windows on the back side and PAGE 31 of 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2805 CARSON ERICKSON, Continued) not exceed a maximum of 300 s.f. Rahn stated that he would support a 42' setback from the creek side. Weinberger noted that the average setback from the property line at the street is 12' in this area. Mabusth once again stated that she would be more comfortable with less setbacks on the side yards in order for it to be pulled further off the street. Smith stated that the Commission would be comfortable with a 12' setback from the street, 10' setbacks from the side yards,and 42' from the approximate creek bank to the deck. Smith asked the applicant if this provided enough direction. Hellier stated that the applicant is in the process of combining families, moving out of a current residence, and would like to see the process moving ahead as quickly as possible with contingent .approvals. Smith stated that she felt they had made significant enough changes to warrant the seeing a new set of plans. Hellier asked if he could bring the new plan to Council. Hawn suggested adding this to the agenda for Wednesday nights meeting. While Bottenberg stated that she would be unable to attend, Gaffron indicated that he could relay her planning report. Mabusth asked to see a copy of the old survey. Bremer stated that based upon the history of Eastlake Street,this application is not asking for much more than the others,it is not out of line with the neighbors and,in fact,the single neighbor who had voiced an objection was granted a variance far greater than what has been proposed. Bottenberg provided the Commission with copies of the old survey, to which individual Commissioners devoted time translating and examining the information. Rahn stated, assuming you could pull a car in the driveway, 15' would be adequate space to him to support the application as long as the deck were changed. PAGE 32 of 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2805 CARSON ERICKSON, Continued) Weinberger noted that the average commercial parking stall is 20' deep. Based on a 20' street setback, Rahn further suggested the applicant maintain 50' on the rear, 42' from the creek, and 20' total from the sides. Hellier stated that he would take this information, speak to the owner,and hope to turn it around in time to attend the Wednesday night meeting. Rahn suggested hearing this item first, prior to the Dahlstrom Development piece. Berg moved,Bremer seconded,to table Application#02-2805,Carson Erickson,3415 Eastlake Street,at the applicants request in order to allow them time to redesign the proposal.VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0. (#14) #02-2808 JIM AND JEAN ECHTENKAMP, 2800 PHEASANT ROAD,VARIANCES 11:21 p.m. - 11:30 p.m. Weinberger reported that the applicants have requested a hardcover and an average lakeshore setback variance to permit redevelopment of the property. The intention is to remove the existing residence and construct a new residence on the property. Variances approved in 1990 established a maximum allowed hardcover of 35.5% in the 75-250' lakeshore setback area. Weinberger pointed out that the total hardcover in the 0-75' setback would be reduced by 983 s.f. with the proposed design. The property is two acres in size with approximately 1,600' of shoreline and includes a peninsula. Because the lot is on a peninsula,views from adjacent residential buildings are not directly affected. The new house is being moved further from the lake leaving more lake view for the house to the north of the peninsula. Weinberger noted that staff recommends approval of the average lakeshore setback variance based on the fact that the property is a peninsula lot and there is no suitable building site on the entire 2 acres without a variance. Staff could also support allowing additional hardcover beyond 25%in the 75-250' lakeshore setback based on previous approvals of hardcover on the property in 1990. Weinberger added that the property owners have worked with staff over the past several months to reduce as much hardcover as possible. Mr.Echtenkamp complimented Weinberger on his summary,adding that after years of mistreatment, their goal is to restore the property to the outstanding piece it once was.He stated that they are taking a nonconforming property, making it conform and asking for a variance to do PAGE 33 of 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2808 JIM AND JEAN ECHTENKAMP, Continued) so. Echtenkamp believed this to be a win-win situation for both parties. There were no public comments. The Echtenkamps stated that their neighbors,the Smileys were in attendance, however, due to the late hour they had departed with their children earlier. Smith acknowledged that they have a very unique lot with evident limitations. Mabusth stated the hardships were evident and she had no problem supporting approval. Bremer, Rahn, and Berg concurred. Hawn moved,Berg seconded,to approve Applications#02-2808,Jim and Jean Echtenkamp, 2800 Pheasant Road,granting hardcover and average lakeshore setback variances permitting new construction not to exceed the amount of existing hardcover on the property. Although large in acreage,the property is compromised by the fact that it is a peninsula and surrounded by water and virtually all of it is in the 0-75' lakeshore setback,which limits its buildability. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0. (#17)Report of Planning Commission representatives attending Council meetings on June 24, and July 8,2002. Berg stated that on June 24 the Daisy Diner was discussed, neighboring issues were addressed to which mediation is beginning. The Council did vote to allow Class I Restaurants as a permitted use. Gaffron noted that if a restaurant does move in, it could do so without further approval, as long as parking is met. Berg reported that the Pass's conservation easement passed. Smith reported that during the July 8 meeting, she learned that there are six potential planning commissioner alternates to choose from. She stated that the fill at Fox Ridge was contested, as the applicant brought his own engineer's report and legal team to address the Council. Weinberger added that they will be reverifying the wetland delineation report. PAGE 34 of 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (CITY COUNCIL REPORTS, CONTINUED) Smith explained that the Kosek's, on Shadywood Road, not only received their variance,but were given a lock box and sidewalk by the Council who believed she would only be back to ask for them later. Berg noted that the old driveway was removed and replaced by sod and gardens. She added that it looked very good. Smith reported that the Park Commission will be taking an annual park tour Monday,July 29,at 5:30 P.M. in lieu of their August regular meeting. Hawn inquired about the status of a walkable communities tour. Gaffron suggested this concept be revisited in 1-2 months as the City moves forward on its first such community. Hawn asked if the Commissioners could be provided with addresses to visit on their own time. Gaffron stated that he would talk to Planning Consultant Case with regard to such communities. Berg suggested people simply stop in at Centennial Lakes in Edina or Libertyville in Stillwater. With regard to Landforms proposal,Berg questioned if the housing seemed extremely expensive to others beside her. Gaffron noted that the lofts are priced from $225,000 plus. Berg asked why, as a potential resident, she would move there as opposed true walkable areas in Wayzata or Edina. Gaffron stated that Landforms people believe these units can sell for that in this market,although he had not seen the numbers to support this. Berg indicated that she would be interested in seeing a market analysis or study that supports their assertions. PAGE 35 of 36 • • r MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 15, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#18) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION None. (#19) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR JUNE 17, 2002 Rahn changed p.8,paragraph 2, first line,to read" ..to push the garage out toward the street.." and p.10, line 2, "Palm stated..." not Rahn. Berg moved,Bremer seconded,to approve the Minutes of June 17,2002 Planning Commission Meeting as amended. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0, with Mabusth and Hawn abstaining. (#20)SELECTION OF REPRESENTATIVES FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ON JULY 22, 2002 AND AUGUST 12, 2002. July 22 - Smith August 12 - Mabusth OLD ISSUES Gaffron asked if the Commission would consider getting back on track with the every other month work session schedule. Smith suggested putting together a calendar of these dates. ADJOURNMENT Mabusth moved, Fritzler seconded, to adjourn the meeting at 11:55 P.M. There being no further business to discuss, the meeting adjourned at 11:55 P.M. Sandra Smith, Chair PAGE 36 of 36