HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/17/2004 Planning Commission Minutes PUBLIC ATTENDANCE
MEETING DATE _ 17-)C?(-*
❑ COUNCIL
JPLANNING 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
t.
2. (f .R I o e;f ; /co i L I' (,rte.,f- -
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
W:\Administrative Support\(Forms)\Public Attendance.wpd
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, February 17, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
ROLL
The Commission met on the above mentioned date with the following members present:
Acting Chair Jeanne Mabusth; Commissioners Cynthia Bremer, David Rahn, J. Mark
Fritzler, and Liz Hawn; Representing staff were Planning Director Mike Gaffron, Planners
Melanie Curtis and Janice Gundlach, and Recorder Kristi Anderson.
Chair Sandra Smith, Commissioner Stephanie Zugschwert, and City Council liaison Bob
Sansevere were absent.
Acting Chair Mabusth called the meeting to order at 6:04 P.M.
CONSENT AGENDA
*(#1) #04-2981 JEFF MARTINEAU,2565 NORTH SHORE DRIVE,
VARIANCES
Fritzler moved,Acting Chair Mabusth seconded, to recommend approval of
Application#04-2981, approval of a hardcover variance to reduce the hardcover
within the 0-75' setback zone by 52 s.f. for the residence at 2565 North Shore Drive.
VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
OLD BUSINESS
(#2)#04-2969 TERRY AND GRETCHEN BLOUNT, 1390 CHERRY PLACE,
VARIANCES AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (6:07-6:15 P.M.)
Gretchen Blount,the applicant, was present.
Gundlach explained that the applicants have decided to apply for a simple interior
remodeling permit; therefore,would not be needing the lot area and lot width variances as
originally expected. The applicants wish to be given a hardcover variance to reconstruct an
existing rotting deck and average lakeshore setback variance to allow the corner of the
deck to encroach 4' into the average lakeshore setback zone. Gundlach pointed out that
neighboring views would not be obstructed by the replacement of the deck, since the grade
changes are dramatic. She suggested the Commission table the conditional use permit
request to allow landscape restoration in the 0-75' zone until more detailed plans can be
submitted once weather permits for review and approval by the City Engineer.
In order to meet hardcover restrictions for new construction, the Blount's believed the
design had become aesthetically unattractive and not worth the investment to build new
construction. Although they would have preferred a front porch and first floor bedroom,
Ms. Blount stated that they will remodel the existing cottage instead of build new.
PAGE 1 of 19
r
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, February 17, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#2) #04-2969 TERRY AND GRETCHEN BLOUNT, 1390 CHERRY PLACE,
VARIANCES AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT—Continued)
Hawn moved, Bremer seconded, to recommend approval of a deck replacement in the 75'
—250' zone for Application#04-2969, granting a hardcover variance to reconstruct an
existing rotting deck and average lakeshore setback variance to allow a 4' encroachment of
the deck into the average lakeshore setback. In addition, tabling the conditional use permit
for landscape restoration in the 0-75' zone until weather permits the applicant to submit
more detailed plans for review by the City Engineer. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
(#3) #04-2971 HICKORY FINE HOMES, INC.,3220 AND 3240
WATERTOWN ROAD, LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT (postponed after item#4)
(#4) #04-2974 RELIANCE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LLP, NW CORNER OF
WILLOW DRIVE AND HIGHWAY 12, PUD REZONING, COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN AMENDMENT, PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION,AND COMMERCIAL
SITE PLAN REVIEW(6:15-7:43 P.M.)
John Trautz, Reliance Development, and Steve Johnston, the Applicant's Representatives,
were present.
Gaffron explained that the applicants propose a commercial retail/office development on
Outlot A of StoneBay. The proposal requires an amendment of the Community
Management Plan(CMP)to allow freestanding retail uses that are not directly associated
with supporting an office use on the site. The proposal includes a rezoning via the Planned
Unit Development(PUD)process from RR-1B (SFR, 2 acre minimum) to B-6 PUD
(Highway Commercial District).
The proposed development includes a subdivision of the 3.69 acre site into 3 separate
building lots as follows:
Lot 1: 1.53 acres - 10,000 s.f. office/retail building
Lot 2: 0.86 acres - 5,000 s.f. bank building
Lot 3: 1.30 acres - 14,490 s.f. Walgreen's retail/pharmacy building
Gaffron pointed out that, while staff supports the Comprehensive Plan Amendment,the
rezoning to B-6 PUD, and proposed mix of retail and office uses, staff has been working
with the applicants regarding ongoing revisions to the site plan and circulation. He
explained that there are two specific areas of the current plan which staff would
recommend revisions. Gaffron encouraged the Planning Commission to reach a
conclusion on the Comp Plan Amendment, review any rezoning concerns or stipulations
they wish to place on the PUD, and spend time reviewing the development aspects of the
site, providing staff with any concerns to be addressed regarding building design and
styling, landscaping, lighting, signage, etc.
PAGE 2 of 19
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, February 17, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#4) #04-2974 RELIANCE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LLP,NW CORNER OF
WILLOW DRIVE AND HIGHWAY 12, PUD REZONING, COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN AMENDMENT, PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION,AND COMMERCIAL
SITE PLAN REVIEW—Continued)
In addition,based on comments received from Phil Carlson, the City's Planning
Consultant, Gaffron suggested the Commission handle the Land Use Plan amendment first
and separately. Since this would be an amendment to the Comp Plan, Gaffron felt that
some discussion of the overall intent and character to be achieved should be made.
Gaffron indicated that, if the Planning Commission wishes to take a step toward approval,
it is staff's recommendation that an amendment to the Land Use Plan should include the
following:
Allow service retail uses, such as a pharmacy,bank, coffee shop, dry cleaners, and
similar neighborhood and community scale uses (uses can be further defined if you
wish), with the following characteristics:
1) The development plan shall incorporate exceptional design, integrated into
the site and surroundings, and featuring high quality building materials and
architectural detailing.
2) No single use shall occupy more than 15,000 square feet of floor area.
3) There shall be generous, well-planned green space, landscaping, and
buffering throughout the entire site, exceeding the minimums in the Orono
Code for similar developments.
4) There shall be a clear, well-designed connection and orientation to the pond
west of the site, such that patrons can see the pond from the development,
pedestrians can easily walk to and around the pond, and adjacent uses will
orient windows, outdoor seating areas, and other elements toward the pond.
5) There shall be clear, well-designed sidewalk connections from the
sidewalks and trails surrounding the site(on Kelley Parkway,Willow
Drive, and Highway 12) to all points within the development, especially
from access points that serve the residential development to the north.
6) The scale and type of uses, and the design of the site, shall be such that
overall traffic into and out of the site will not be more than under the
previously assumed office use designation in the Land Use Plan.
PAGE 3 of 19
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, February 17, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#4) #04-2974 RELIANCE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LLP,NW CORNER OF
WILLOW DRIVE AND HIGHWAY 12, PUD REZONING, COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN AMENDMENT, PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION,AND COMMERCIAL
SITE PLAN REVIEW—Continued)
7) The site plan shall be designed to provide clear and safe traffic movements
within the site for all internal movements: entrances, exits, parking areas,
drive-through lanes, loading/service areas, and driveways.
8) The overall site plan shall be designed such that the orientation of buildings
is not mainly to Highway 12,but also creates a significant sense of place
internally in the site.
9) If ownership of the site is to be divided among two or more lots with more
than one owner,provisions shall be made for adequate handling of access,
parking, landscaping,maintenance, and other reasonable site conditions in a
manner that can be guaranteed by the City.
Furthermore, if the Planning Commission recommends approval for the Land Use Plan
amendment, with or without any of the above specific conditions attached, a
recommendation for approval of the rezoning to B6-PUD could also be made, assuming
the Commission is generally satisfied with the current plan. Gaffron pointed out that the
other option would be to not recommend approval for the rezoning until the Commission
has seen a plan with which they are completely satisfied.
It is suggested that a recommendation regarding a rezoning should include development
parameters that will become zoning requirements for the property, and include the
following:
Recommend approval of a rezoning to PUD for Stonebay Marketplace, with the
following conditions:
1) Development on the site must follow the design for buildings,parking
areas, landscaping, and all other site features illustrated on the submission
for Stonebay Marketplace by Landform for Reliance Development, sheets
x-xx, dated x-x-x. No deviation from these designs shall be allowed
without approval of an amendment to the PUD by the Orono City Council,
except for minor adjustments to be approved by City staff, at the discretion
of the Development Review Committee.
2) The orientation of the Walgreen's building and parking areas shall be
changed to place the main entry in the southwest corner of the building.
PAGE 4 of 19
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, February 17, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#4) #04-2974 RELIANCE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LLP, NW CORNER OF
WILLOW DRIVE AND HIGHWAY 12, PUD REZONING,COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN AMENDMENT, PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION,AND COMMERCIAL
SITE PLAN REVIEW—Continued)
3) Green space within the site will increase as follows in the following
locations:
4) The connection and orientation to the pond west of the site will be changed
to
5) The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City to
insure adequate provision for access,parking, landscaping, maintenance,
and other reasonable site conditions, including
6) All buildings and improvements shown on the submitted plans will be
completed by x-x-x [date], and if not, the remainder of the site will be
sodded [condition of all areas of the site if left undeveloped] . . .
With regard to permitted uses in the B-6 District, Gaffron stated that these include business
and professional offices; banks and financial institutions; libraries; and motels &hotels. In
addition, retail uses are allowed in B-6 only via the PUD development process. Rezoning
this site to B-6 PUD is allowed under the"Special Requirements for Rezoning in the
Highway 12 Corridor Study Area"of zoning code Section 78-1065, and was anticipated
during the approval of the Stonebay plat. B-6 is the appropriate zoning for the proposed
use. Since Sections 78-643 thru 78-793 additionally contain a number of development
standards applicable to this site, Gaffron suggested the Commission review the permitted,
conditional, and accessory uses allowed in B-1 and B-6 zoning regulations.
In terms of uses, Trautz questioned whether a PUD with B-1 zoning would be more
appropriate to the site. While he believed 5 of the 6 underlying conditions as recommended
by staff to be reasonable, Trautz found the requirement of Walgreen's to be reoriented to
place the main entry in the southwest corner of the building a concern to this retailer. He
asked for some flexibility on this point.
Johnston distributed a revised site plan, version 17, since the work session the past week,
which showed a decrease in impervious surface and an increase in green space to 26.5%.
He pointed out that many sidewalks connect to the site and buildings and agreed that the
only issue may be the Walgreen's orientation.
Acting Chair Mabusth asked the Commissioners how comfortable they were with
approving the changes to the amendment without having final plans in hand. She was
uncomfortable proceeding without final plans.
PAGE 5 of 19
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, February 17, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#4) #04-2974 RELIANCE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LLP, NW CORNER OF
WILLOW DRIVE AND HIGHWAY 12, PUD REZONING,COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN AMENDMENT, PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION,AND COMMERCIAL
SITE PLAN REVIEW—Continued)
Rahn concurred.
Hawn stated that she was hesitant to proceed at all without comment by Long Lake. She
maintained that early conversations with Long Lake had guided retail to the Long Lake
area, not Willow, and that representatives of Long Lake had indicated to her that they
would be interested in reviewing this proposal. Since the past Planning stance has been to
cooperate with Long Lake and plan together the development of this corridor beginning
with Long Lake, Hawn felt this to be premature without more official conversations with
Long Lake. She suggested the Commission extend a formal invitation to the Long Lake
Planning Commission to join them for a joint work session to discuss the proposal before
moving forward. Although she was sympathetic to not delay the applicant, she was
hesitant to proceed until a process had been begun with Long Lake.
Although he could see that no formal approvals would be granted this evening, Johnston
requested that the Commission provide them with direction to continue the process moving
forward. He asked to be given the opportunity to address questions this evening and be
provided feedback as to whether they were on the right track, rather than making a mistake
which would cost the applicant an additional 30 days delay.
While the Commission believed the underlying B-6 zoning appropriate, Gaffron suggested
the Commission review the B-1 list of 30-35 specific uses and 8 conditional uses to see if
they could be added to the acceptable uses list for this PUD. The Commission reviewed the
B-1 uses omitting Laundromats,plumbing, electrical,heating,temporary sales- Christmas
tree lots, and home and garden equipment rental from the list of acceptable uses. Under
Conditional uses, items 1, 2, 5, 6, and 7 were removed, while item 8 —professional office
and offices of a general nature was added to the list of acceptable uses. Within the list of
accessory uses, item 1 was removed. No changes to the B-6 uses were suggested.
Trautz requested that the Conditional use Class I restaurant use be added to the permitted
uses section of the code for a regular use and place restrictive language upon what type of
food service is provided.
Gaffron stated that B-6 doesn't address Class II restaurants at all, which would include
drive-thru fast food type restaurants.
Hawn stated that she would not support the addition of another drive-thru restaurant,
although she could endorse a restaurant that serves wine/beer.
PAGE 6 of 19
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, February 17, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#4) #04-2974 RELIANCE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LLP,NW CORNER OF
WILLOW DRIVE AND HIGHWAY 12, PUD REZONING, COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN AMENDMENT, PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION,AND COMMERCIAL
SITE PLAN REVIEW—Continued)
Gaffron stated that, if the Commission wished to restrict the type of restaurant uses they
would or would not allow, the Commission would need to identify aspects of what they
will and will not allow.
Rahn stated that, currently, any restaurant with a drive-thru would have to be approved via
a CUP.
Acting Chair Mabusth suggested the PUD be written that any proposed change in
restaurant use be subject to review by the City.
Bremer proposed the coffee shop be viewed as drive-thru with incidental food use. She
suggested food prep issues be the trigger to treat uses differently.
Hawn questioned why the City just doesn't make the proposed coffee shop a drive-thru
with a CUP which the City grants.
Gaffron concurred, stating that all restaurant uses could be CUP, entitling the City to grant
those they find more palatable than others.
Trautz suggested the coffee shop apply for a CUP based on the fact that the food prep is
not performed on site.
With regard to the orientation of the Walgreen's, Bremer stated that she liked the
orientation as proposed.
Rahn concurred, stating that he did not wish to create unneeded parking issues with the
revised orientation. As proposed,parking was short 26 spaces on site and Rahn did not
wish to see the situation worsen.
Johnston stated that Walgreen's has estimated, through their vast retailing experience, that
they need 60 spaces for this size location.
Although Gaffron stated that he would need to run the latest plan past the traffic planner
for feedback,he did not feel the parking situation for the Walgreen's retailer to be a
problem. He did point out, however, that the amount of parking depends on the specific
use of any particular site. He pointed out that the City does not have the luxury of overflow
parking at these sites.
PAGE 7 of 19
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, February 17, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#4) #04-2974 RELIANCE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LLP, NW CORNER OF
WILLOW DRIVE AND HIGHWAY 12, PUD REZONING, COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN AMENDMENT, PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION,AND COMMERCIAL
SITE PLAN REVIEW—Continued)
Rahn stated that he did not wish to create another parking scenario as the problem faced by
Otten Brothers and the Karate studio where overlap of classes has wreaked havoc on the
parking supply.
Acting Chair Mabusth asked whether the structural cover was an issue.
Gaffron stated that, although the proposal is over on structural cover, the City has allowed
up to 16-18% structural cover at other sites. He asked whether the Commission could
allow this as a trade-off if it believes this to be a benefit to the community.
There were no public comments.
Acting Chair Mabusth indicated that she,too, would prefer to wait to make a comp plan
amendment until after the Commission had met with the Long Lake Planning Commission.
Gaffron stated that they could invite the Commission to Orono's regular work session
scheduled for March 3`d, 2004.
Hawn stated that she felt version 17 was far better than what had previously been proposed
by the applicant.
Acting Chair Mabusth moved, Hawn seconded,to table Application #04-2974,
StoneBay Marketplace, NW Quadrant Hwy 12/Willow Drive, a Proposed
Commercial PUD Development, Comprehensive Plan Amendment, PUD Rezoning,
Commercial Site Plan Review, and Preliminary Subdivision in order to invite the
Long Lake Planning Commission to join the Orono Planning Commission for a work
session with the applicant to review the proposal on March 3,2004. VOTE: Ayes 5,
Nays 0.
NEW BUSINESS
(#3) #04-2971 HICKORY FINE HOMES, INC., 3220 AND 3240
WATERTOWN ROAD, LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT (7:43-7:54 P.M.)
Steve Bohl,representing the Applicant, was present.
Gaffron explained that this is a proposed 2-lot residential re-plat of property located
adjacent to Stubbs Bay Creek. In August 1990, the City of Orono approved the plat of
Senn Orono Addition, creating Lot 1 (3240 Watertown Road), Lot 2 and Outlot A
PAGE 8 of 19
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, February 17, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#3) #04-2971 HICKORY FINE HOMES, INC.,3220 AND 3240
WATERTOWN ROAD, LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT—Continued)
(combined as 3220 Watertown Road). The property contains protected wetlands and a
protected tributary creek. The plat was approved two years before adoption of Orono's
Shoreland Ordinance and one year prior to enactment of the Minnesota Wetland
Conservation Act(WCA). Both of these subsequent regulations are applicable to the
future development of the properties, and each has significant impacts on their buildability.
Neither lot has ever been built on.
As a result, applicants are proposing a complete lot line rearrangement to allow relocation
of the proposed driveway(which was never built and now would not be approved in its
1990 configuration due to Shoreland restrictions) and to allow for slight revisions in
potential house locations. The new plat is subject to `front lot/back lot' area and setback
standards which were also not in effect in 1990.
Gaffron pointed out that the applicant has provided a grading plan and design for the
driveway and creek crossing, which require a number of variances. The plan also indicates
proposed house locations and elevations. The City Engineer has reviewed the proposal and
suggested the incorporation of vegetative buffers adjacent to either side of the creek for
stormwater treatment. Gaffron noted that the City Engineer also indicated that the top
surface of the driveway crossing should be lowered from elevation 973.0' to 972' to allow
for an open channel overflow that will be 2' lower than the lowest floor of the upstream
residences. Finally, Kellogg has indicated that the culvert should be an arch RCP to allow
this reduction in height.
Gaffron reviewed the summary of issues for discussion as follows:
1. Width variance for Lot 1 -hardship is site topography.
2. Hardcover variance required for driveway and creek crossing within 75' of OHW-
depending on final driveway width, will be 3% - 5%of 0-75'zone.
3. Park fee for Lot 1 - did it meet its obligation in 1990, or is this creation of a new
buildable site subject to current park fee...?
4. Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee -payable only for Lot 1?
5. Establishment of 35'buffers along creek for stormwater management - should any
other specific conditions apply to protect the creek?
6. Status of MCWD permitting process?
Gaffron indicated that staff recommends preliminary plat approval subject to:
PAGE 9 of 19
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, February 17, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#3) #04-2971 HICKORY FINE HOMES, INC.,3220 AND 3240
WATERTOWN ROAD, LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT—Continued)
1. Granting of a hardcover variance for the driveway creek crossing.
2. Granting of a lot width variance for Lot 1.
3. Requirement of 35'vegetative buffer/easement along both sides of the creek.
4. Submittal of final driveway design prior to issuance of building permits.
5. Driveway width subject to approval of Fire Marshal.
6. Subject to all recommendations noted in the City Engineer's letter of 1-22-04,plus
any drainage provisions deemed necessary by City Engineer to accommodate
drainage from the east.
7. Council to determine applicability of Park Fee and Storm Water&Drainage Trunk
Fee.
8. Subject to the area southeast of the creek within Lot 1 with slopes of 18% or
greater being deemed as non-buildable.
9. Final plat approval shall not be granted until MCWD permits have been approved.
Acting Chair Mabusth stated that she felt it was important to point out to the applicants
that this is the only access that will be allowed over the creek for a driveway crossing.
Gaffron stated that staff would draft covenants to reflect that sentiment.
Although this would be left to the City Council to decide, Acting Chair Mabusth stated that
she believed it would be unfair to ask the applicants for additional park dedication fees.
Hawn concurred.
There were no public comments.
Bohl stated that the applicants were comfortable with the nonbuildable designations.
Hawn moved,Rahn seconded, to recommend approval of Application#04-2971,
Hickory Fine Homes request for a lot line rearrangement and preliminary plat
subject to:
1. Granting of a hardcover variance for the driveway creek crossing.
2. Granting of a lot width variance for Lot 1.
3. Requirement of 35' vegetative buffer/easement along both sides of the creek.
4. Submittal of fmal driveway design prior to issuance of building permits.
5. Driveway width subject to approval of Fire Marshal.
6. Subject to all recommendations noted in the City Engineer's letter of 1-22-04,
plus any drainage provisions deemed necessary by City Engineer to
accommodate drainage from the east.
7. Council to determine applicability of Park Fee and Storm Water& Drainage
Trunk Fee.
PAGE 10 of 19
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, February 17, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#3) #04-2971 HICKORY FINE HOMES, INC., 3220 AND 3240
WATERTOWN ROAD, LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT—Continued)
8. Subject to the area southeast of the creek within Lot 1 with slopes of 18% or
greater being deemed as non-buildable.
9. Final plat approval shall not be granted until MCWD permits have been
approved.
VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
(#5) #04-2983 JAMES AND JEAN ECHTENKAMP, 2800 PHEASANT ROAD,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, (7:54-8:05 P.M.)
James and Jean Echtenkamp, the Applicant, was present.
Gaffron stated that the applicant requests CUP approval for filling within 75'of the lake to
avoid construction of a retaining wall at the 75' setback line adjacent to the driveway.
Briefly, this property was granted hardcover variances in 2002 for a rebuild. The basis to
allow the hardcover excesses was primarily related to the peninsula shape of the lot,
leaving about 1.5 acres of the 2-acre lot in the 0-75'zone; and the placement of house and
driveway which allows for an unusually substantial area of lawn in the runoff flow path for
infiltration.
In order to avoid filling in the 0-75'zone to accommodate the driveway, the applicant was
approved for a retaining wall adjacent to the driveway. Now that the house is completed
and final grades established, applicant has concerns about the necessary height of the
retaining wall. From staff's perspective, safety is the primary factor which suggests that
eliminating the wall may be appropriate. The wall as approved was right at the edge of the
driveway, with an immediate drop of 2.5', then a 1:1 downslope for another 3-4', with
gradual slope after that. The driveway functionally is about 6' above original grade at this
point, and filling/grading would have stopped at the 75' setback line. This immediate grade
change in an area that will have pedestrian traffic, children playing, etc. is less than ideal.
The visual impacts of the wall would be primarily as it is viewed from the lagoon.
Grading the slope and vegetating it would provide a softer and more natural view from the
lagoon than a 64'long, 2'-6" high wall. The driveway itself will not be very visible from
the lagoon regardless of whether the wall is built.
Applicant has suggested that creating a slope from the driveway(elev. 942') to the existing
grade(934')would eliminate 64'of retaining wall, or approximately 50-60 s.f. of
hardcover, which would allow for a better situation in terms of runoff. The trade-off is that
rainfall that would have fallen on a relatively flat lawn surface at the base of the wall, will
now fall on a slope and be somewhat more prone to run off than soak in during certain
storm events. It's probably an even trade.
PAGE 11 of 19
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, February 17, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#5) #04-2983 JAMES AND JEAN ECHTENKAMP,2800 PHEASANT ROAD,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT—Continued)
City code requires finish grades to be 3:1 or flatter in a situation such as this. Therefore,
the 8'total drop translates to a 24'wide slope. The driveway is about 79' from the
shoreline, so the toe of the fill area will be approximately 55' from the shoreline, and the
filled area will be about 80'in length. Total fill needed to do this is estimated by staff at
approximately 250 cubic yards of material The fill will cover approximately 1900 s.f.;
about 2/3 of this in the 0-75'zone.
Gaffron indicated that staff recommends approval of a variance and CUP to allow the fill
as proposed in the 0-75'zone, to allow for elimination of the previously approved retaining
wall,based on the plan increasing safety of the site,reducing the negative visual impacts of
a wall at the 75' setback, and resulting in maintenance of an equivalent level of stormwater
treatment, subject to:
1. Final grade of slope to be established at 3:1; and
2. Establishment of a 5-10' wide unmowed vegetated buffer(raingarden) for
infiltration at the base of the slope.
Jean Echtenkamp stated that the originally proposed retaining wall would look far more
unnatural than a gradual slope. James Echtenkamp agreed, stating that the wall was, not
only unsafe,but also the runoff would be handled better with a natural amenity.
There were no public comments.
Hawn suggested they incorporate a small swale or bump into the slope to slow runoff. She
felt this to be a better solution that the retaining wall.
Mr. Echtenkamp stated that he would incorporate a small furrow at the midpoint with
possible plantings subject to staff approval.
Fritzler urged the applicant to stay abreast of the amount of fill added to the site in order to
avoid any misconceptions as to the approved amounts and the potential of having to
remove fill at a later date.
Bremer moved,Rahn seconded,to recommend approval of Application#04-2983,
approval of a variance and CUP to allow the fill as proposed in the 0-75' zone, to
allow for the elimination of the previously approved retaining wall,based on the plan
increasing safety of the site, reducing the negative visual impacts of a wall at the 75'
setback, and resulting in maintenance of an equivalent level of stormwater treatment,
subject to:
1. Final grade of slope to be established at 3:1; and
PAGE 12 of 19
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, February 17, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#5) #04-2983 JAMES AND JEAN ECHTENKAMP,2800 PHEASANT ROAD,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT—Continued)
2. Establishment of a 5-10' wide unmowed vegetated buffer (raingarden)
for infiltration at the base of the slope.
VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
(#6) #04-2984 MCCARTHY CONSTRUCTION ON BEHALF OF BERSHIRE
PROPERTIES, 2745 KELLY PARKWAY, COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN REVIEW,
(follows item#7)
(#7) #04-2985 TOM CULLUM, 785 FERNDALE ROAD NORTH,
VARIANCE (8:05—8:18 P.M.)
Tom Cullum, the Applicant, was present.
Gaffron explained that the applicant requests variance approval for filling of a small
portion of a City-protected wetland located mostly within applicant's property but partially
within the neighboring property. The fill is intended to allow for the establishment of
woody vegetation along the western property boundary. The 2,135 s.f. fill area will convert
approximately 10% of the existing wetland from a shallow open water wetland to a
wetland with saturated soils. Because the project will also involve excavation of adjacent
upland to create new wetland(requiring a CUP), the project is being treated by the
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District as a No Loss situation, and as a wetland restoration
based on reducing the impacts of wetland excavation that occurred in the 1950's
The property contains a small wetland which was modified in the 1950's (based on
airphoto evidence)by dredging to make it deeper. The wetland since that time has
generally had the characteristics of an open water pond. A residence has existed on the
property since 1963,undergoing numerous remodels and additions since its original
construction.
As a result of legal vegetation removals by the neighboring property owner to the west,
Gaffron stated that the applicant's view over the pond area has changed, and now he views
the neighboring residence rather than a wooded area. Because the far shore of the pond is
on the neighboring property, applicant is proposing fill in a portion of the pond just inside
his property boundary to create a"berm", which will allow the establishment of wooded
vegetation to regain some of the wooded character of the lot and provide a buffer to the
neighboring property. It may be somewhat ironic that the neighbor may have removed the
vegetation to gain a view of the pond, and the current proposal would tend to negate the
impacts of that activity
With passage of the WCA, the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District was designated by the
City as the responsible Local Government Unit(LGU) for administering the WCA
PAGE 13 of 19
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, February 17, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#7) #04-2985 TOM CULLUM, 785 FERNDALE ROAD NORTH,
VARIANCE—Continued)
regulations. These regulations provide degrees of flexibility for certain types of wetland
alteration activities which are seen as positive rather than detrimental, and they provide for
mitigation of negative impacts when they are unavoidable.
The WCA regulations also provide standards and opportunities for wetland restoration,
where prior human activity has changed or degraded a wetland and it is possible to bring it
back to nearer its original conditions.
On the other hand, Gaffron indicated that Orono's ordinances have never been specifically
revised to accommodate the WCA regulations; the Zoning Code still simply prohibits
filling within a wetland (requiring a variance and showing of a hardship) and requires a
conditional use permit for land alterations in, or within 26'of, a wetland. The Zoning Code
provides virtually no specific standards for when a wetland alteration should be allowed,
and in the Shoreland section merely suggests a list of factors to be considered; however,
the City's Surface Water Management Plan(SWMP) in Section 5 "Wetlands
Management"does establish a detailed management approach to maintaining or improving
the City's wetland resources.
Gaffron pointed out that the applicant initially contacted staff regarding this project a year
ago, and has engaged a variety of professionals to design a project that would meet the
WCA guidelines for a wetland restoration,No-Loss status. The MCWD as the designated
LGU for Orono has approved the project with certain conditions.
This application was directed by staff to John Smyth, Water Resource Specialist with
Bonestroo & Associates, the City's engineering and environmental consultants. His
favorable comments reflect that the project will result in an overall improvement to the
wetland. He notes that the additional wetland to be created will meet the WCA
replacement guidelines. He also notes that this project could in fact be considered as a
restoration, and he recommends approval conditioned on 1) that the City receive a copy of
the executed buffer preservation declaration required by the MCWD, and 2) that the City
be provided with the required ongoing monitoring reports.
Staff is satisfied that the basic considerations regarding the functions and values of this
wetland have been taken into consideration by the variety of reviewers of this proposal, all
of whom have recommended or granted approval. Staff recommends approval of the
variance and CUP to allow the wetland alteration project including filling of a portion of
the wetland and excavation within 26'of the wetland,per the plan approved by the MCWD
and subject to the conditions thereof, and subject to the following provisions as
recommended by the City wetlands consultant:
PAGE 14 of 19
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, February 17, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#7) #04-2985 TOM CULLUM, 785 FERNDALE ROAD NORTH,
VARIANCE—Continued)
1) that the City receive a copy of the executed buffer preservation declaration
required by the MCWD, and
2) that the City be provided with the required ongoing monitoring reports.
Staff would further recommend that the applicant be required to execute the standard
Flowage and Conservation Easement over the wetland and its MCWD-required buffers.
Mr. Cullum stated that the original pond was a spring fed pond which was dredged and
excavated in the 1950's and has dried up to some degree since; therefore,requiring him to
circulate the water within the basin.
Rahn stated that he was satisfied that the applicant had gone to great lengths to achieve his
goal.
There were no public comments.
Acting Chair Mabusth moved, Hawn seconded,to recommend approval of
Application#04-2985, granting approval of the variance and CUP to allow the
wetland alteration project including filling of a portion of the wetland and excavation
within 26' of the wetland, per the plan approved by the MCWD and subject to the
conditions thereof, and subject to the following provisions as recommended by the
City wetlands consultant:
1) that the City receive a copy of the executed buffer preservation
declaration required by the MCWD, and
2) that the City be provided with the required ongoing monitoring
reports.
Staff would further recommend that the applicant be required to execute the
standard Flowage and Conservation Easement over the wetland and its MCWD-
required buffers.VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
(#6) #04-2984 MCCARTHY CONSTRUCTION ON BEHALF OF BERSHIRE
PROPERTIES, 2745 KELLY PARKWAY, COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN REVIEW,
(8:18-8:40 P.M.)
Bob Ritter, Applicant's representative, was present.
Gundlach stated that the applicant requests a commercial site plan review in order to obtain
a building permit to construct a 36,000 square foot medical office building. In November
of 2002, Professional Properties of Orono, Inc. received approval for the dental office
building that exists just to the west of the applicant's property. During this time the
applicant's property was platted and given an address with the expectation that the site
PAGE 15 of 19
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, February 17, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#6) #04-2984 MCCARTHY CONSTRUCTION ON BEHALF OF BERSHIRE
PROPERTIES, 2745 KELLY PARKWAY, COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN REVIEW
—Continued)
would develop as Phase II. The applicant's current proposal is in accordance with those
expectations and is proposed as a medical office building to be known as Orono
Professional Medical Building II.
Gundlach explained that the property is surrounded on the east and west sides by
properties zoned B-6. The property has frontage on Kelley Parkway to the north(zoned
Residential), and Wayzata Boulevard to the south(zoned Industrial). The setbacks for
parking shall be 20' at the fronts and 5' for interior side yards. The proposal meets the 20'
setback to Kelley Parkway and the 5' setback at the interior easterly yard. There is a
shared parking arrangement with the dental building to the west, so the construction of the
parking lot will appear contiguous of the parking lot to the west and a 5' parking setback
would not be required. The site plan does not meet the 20' required parking setback along
Highway 12. The applicant must revise the site plan to show a 20' setback to Highway 12
prior to City Council review.
Number of Parking Stalls.
Required= 1 per 200 s.f. of floor area
(Net=36,000 s.f. — 10%= 32,400 s.f. /200= 162 stalls required)
Total stalls required= 162
Total stalls proposed= 157 (5 are proof of parking)
To meet the 20' required yard at Highway 12,mentioned above, the parking will be
reduced by 3 stalls. The applicant has stated that 3 proof of parking can be incorporated
into the revised plan. Staff finds that an additional 3 proof of parking stalls is acceptable to
achieve the 20' required parking yard. 5 proof of parking stalls are proposed in total and
157 stalls will be constructed. Staff finds the 5 proof of parking stalls is acceptable and
these parking stalls would only be constructed if necessary to meet parking demands.
Gundlach noted that the applicant submitted a Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control and
Utility Plan for review by the City Engineer, along with a drainage area map and storm
sewer calculations. All storm water will be directed,via pipe, to the storm water retention
pond to the east. The City Engineer has reviewed all plans as they relate the storm water
and finds them to be acceptable.
While the applicants have submitted a landscape plan, the plan proposes 5 maples, 4 ashes,
8 spruces, and 8 crabapple trees to be distributed around the perimeter of the site(25 trees
total). Goldflame Spirea, a landscape shrub, is proposed along the building and within the
landscape islands. Section 78-797 (8) lays out specific landscaping requirements for
properties located with the B-6 zoning district. The following is a list of requirements
which need to be incorporated into a revised landscape plan prior to City Council approval:
PAGE 16 of 19
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, February 17, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#6) #04-2984 MCCARTHY CONSTRUCTION ON BEHALF OF BERSHIRE
PROPERTIES,2745 KELLY PARKWAY, COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN REVIEW
—Continued)
• An underground irrigation systems shall be installed and maintained,
• The trash receptacle shall be screened,
• 11 trees of at least 2 1/2 inches in caliper shall be incorporated into the landscape
islands,
• A landscaping estimate shall be submitted to the City in an amount equal to the
percentage requirement outlined in Section 78-797, and
• A landscape performance security shall be required, prior to Council approval, at an
amount equal to 1 1/2 times the value of the landscaping.
Gundlach stated that staff recommends approval of the commercial site plan review subject
to the following stipulations:
1. A revised parking plan shall be submitted showing a 20' parking setback from
Highway 12 and the revised parking stall arrangement required to achieve this,
prior to City Council review.
2. Submittal of the shared parking and access arrangement documents prior to City
Council review.
3. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted prior to City Council review which
incorporates the following:
a. An underground irrigation systems shall be installed and maintained,
b. The trash receptacle shall be screened,
c. 11 trees of at least 2 %2 inches in caliper shall be incorporated into the
landscape islands,
d. A landscaping estimate shall be submitted to the City in an amount equal to
the percentage requirement outlined in Section 78-797, and
e. A landscape performance security shall be required,prior to Council
approval, at an amount equal to 1 %2 times the value of the landscaping.
Ritter questioned why this property requires a 20' separation from the parking lot to
Highway 12; whereas, their adjoining property was recently approved at 15'.
Gaffron indicated that 15' was adequate and the 20' requirement would be eliminated from
the application.
Rahn asked if the architectural features on the roof could exceed the 30' height
requirement.
PAGE 17 of 19
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, February 17, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#6) #04-2984 MCCARTHY CONSTRUCTION ON BEHALF OF BERSHIRE
PROPERTIES, 2745 KELLY PARKWAY, COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN REVIEW
—Continued)
Gaffron stated that the features were allowed and added to the aesthetics of the building.
He pointed out that it would be hard to have a pitched roofline and meet the 30' height
requirement.
Acting Chair Mabusth asked what sort of offices would house in this building.
Ritter stated that it seems the demand will be medical, and perhaps include a 24 hour
urgent care center, as well as, general office.
Gaffron stated that the Fire Marshall would review the plans.
Fritzler asked if the building materials would be similar to the Phase I building.
Ritter stated that they proposed red brick and stone look fiberboard.
Hawn moved, Bremer seconded,to recommend approval of Application#04-2984 a
Commercial Site Plan review on behalf of Berkshire Properties, subject to submittal
of the shared parking and access arrangement documents and revised landscape plan
submitted prior to City Council review which incorporates the following:
a. An underground irrigation systems shall be installed and maintained,
b. The trash receptacle shall be screened,
c. 11 trees of at least 2 'A inches in caliper shall be incorporated into the
landscape islands,
d. A landscaping estimate shall be submitted to the City in an amount
equal to the percentage requirement outlined in Section 78-797, and
e. A landscape performance security shall be required, prior to Council
approval, at an amount equal to 1 'A times the value of the landscaping.
VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS
(#8) REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES
ATTENDING COUNCIL MEETINGS OF JANUARY 26, 2004 AND FEBRUARY 9,
2004
Gaffron stated that, on February 9, 2004, the Switz application was tabled for further
hardcover reductions. The Pierpont application was also tabled and the Dayton application
was approved as recommended by the Planning Commission.
PAGE 18 of 19
. .
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, February 17, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#9) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION
The Long Lake Planning Commission will be invited to attend the Work Session of March
3, 2004.
(#10) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR JANUARY 20,
2004
Bremer moved,Acting Chair Mabusth seconded,to Approve the Planning
Commission Meeting Minutes of January 20,2004 as presented. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays
0.
(#11) SELECTION OF REPRESENTATIVES FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS
ON FEBRUARY 23,2004, and MARCH 8, 2004.
February 23 —Rahn March 8 —Fritzler
ADJOURNMENT
Hawn moved,Rahn seconded,to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting at 8:53
P.M. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 8:53 P.M.
Sandra Smith, Chair
PAGE 19 of 19