HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/21/2010 Planning Commission Minutes F,�.��5 ... 'f . .
} �1 �.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANIVING COMIVIISSION MEETING
Monday,June 21,2010
6:30 o'clock p.m.
ROLL
The Orono Planning Commission met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present:
Chair Kim Kang, Commissioners Loren Schoenzeit,Denise Leskinen;and Jon Schwingler. Representing
Staff were Assistant City Administrator for Long-Term Strategic Planning Mike Gaffron,Planning and
Zoning Coordinator Melanie Curtis,Planner Evelyn Turner,and Recorder Jackie Young. Commissioner
Linda Feuss arrived at 6:32 p.m. Mayor James White arrived at 7:35 p.m.
Chair Kang called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.
CONSENT AGENDA
Chair Kang opened the public hearing for Item Nos. 3,4, and 7 at 6:33 p.m.
There were no public comments regarding these items.
Chair Kang closed the public hearing at 6:33 p.m.
Kang moved,Schwingler seconded,to approve the Consent Agenda as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 5,
Nays 0.
NEW BUSINESS
2. #10-3473 CITY OF ORONO,AMENDMENT TO 78-624,RPUD CONDITIONAL USES,
6:34 P.M.—6:53 P.M.
Gaffron stated the City of Orono is proposing an amendment of Zoning Code Section 78-624,which
would add"Assisted Living Facilities"to the list of allowed conditional uses in the Residential Planned
Unit Development District,with a set of required conditions.
Orono has two separate zoning applications for approval of senior assisted living/memory care facilities. .
These are the first proposals Orono has had for such uses,which has caused Staff to review the permitted
and conditional use sections of the Zoning Code to determine whether or how these are defined and
addressed.
Gaffron stated there are a few generally recognized levels for these types of uses: independent living,
assisted living, slcilled nursing care,Alzheimer's or memory care, and rehabilitation. Definitions of these
terms vary from source to source,but the definitions used by the U.S.Department of Health and Human
Services can be found in Attachment A.
The Orono Woods Senior Housing facility at Brown Road and Wayzata Boulevard would be considered
as independent living. It was developed as a permitted"multifamily attached dwelling"use under the
RPUD section of the Zoning Code. However,the Zoning code currently does not specifically address
"assisted living,""memory care,"or"skilled nursing care"facilities. While one might immediately
conclude that any of the three uses might fall under the"multifamily attached dwelling"category,a
conflict arises because the Code does include"nursing homes"as a conditional use in the RR-1B Rural
Page 1
� ,� . ' ? �
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,June 21,2010
6:30 o'clock p.m. �
(#10-3473 CITY OF ORONO,AMENDMENT TO 78-624,RPUD CONDITIONAL USES, CONT)
Residential District,together with a variety of other care facilities. Additionally the B-4 Office and
Professional Business District allows"nursing homes"as a conditional use in the following context:
"78-734, Conditional Uses. Nursing homes,hospitals,rest homes or retirement homes,provided the site
shall contain not less than 600 square feet of lot area for each person to be accommodated, and no
building is located less than 35 feet from the side lot,line."
These or nearly identical provisions have been in the Code since the 1960s. Because there are no
definitions in the code for nursing home,rest home,retirement home,hospital,or sanitarium, one must
make a reasonable interpretation of what they are. Sanitariums and hospitals seem to connote an
institutional level of health care,whereas rest homes,nursing homes, and retirement homes are fairly
synonymous and have more of a residential character with some level of living assistance. Each of the
above uses suggests a living situation that in something other than the standard single-family dwelling
situation.
Gaffron stated it would be a stretch,however,to conclude that nursing homes are the direct equivalent of
multifamily dwellings. If we were to make that leap,then we would have to assume that multifamily
swellings were intended to be allowed in the RR-1B and B-4 districts,which they clearly were not.
In reviewing how other neighboring cities' codes address nursing homes,assisted living and the like,
Staff found that Plymouth allows as a conditional use in its RMF-2 district residential care facilities such
as nursing homes, assisted living facilities and similar facilities,but excludes hospitals, sanitariums or
similar institutions. Minnetonka allows as a conditional use in its R-4 district public or private nursing or
convalescent homes. Golden Valley allows as a pernutted use in its R-4 multifamily district senior and
physical disability housing. It appears there is a wide variety of ways in which cities have addressed the
topic;it appears less common to see them allowed in a single-family district.
•The RPUD District is the only district in which Orono allows multifamily attached dwellings as a
permitted use, and the RPUD code section establishes specific standards for such dwellings with regards
to setbacks, separate of uses,height limitations and outside storage limitations, as well as other
development standards applicable to both multifamily attached and single-family dwelling developments.
Because assisted living facilities are likely to be somewhat similar in character to multifamily uses in their
impacts, and because the appropriate standards for regulating those impacts are generally in place within
the RPUD District standards, it follows that"assisted living facilities"would be an appropriate use in the
RPUD District.
Establishing"assisted living facilities"as a pernutted use in the RPUD District would subject it directly
to all the standards established in that district, all of which were created to be applicable to strictly
residential use. The value in making"assisted living facilities"a conditional use is the ability of the City
to impose additional appropriate conditions in its approvals. Staff believes it would be most appropriate
to add"assisted living facilities"to the RPUD District as a conditional use. This has the additional
benefit of subjecting the use to the various general conditional use standards that ensure appropriate
development.
Page 2 ,
� ; .,
'
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,June 21,2010
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(#10-3473 CITY OF ORONO,AMENDMENT TO 78-624,RPUD CONDITIONAL USES,CONT)
Gaffron noted the scope of this amendment is intended to be fairly narrow at this time and does not intend
to address the appropriate zoning for higher institutional uses such as hospitals.
Staff recommends the following text amendment of Section 78-624,the list of allowed conditional uses in
the RPUD District:
Section 78-624 Conditional Uses. Within the RPUD District,no land or structure shall be used for the
following uses except by conditional use pernut:
1. Public service structures. Public service structures,including but not limited to electric
transmission lines,buildings...(see existing code—no change)...subject to site and building plan
review pursuant to this division.
2. Assisted living facilities. Assisted living facilities as defined in this Chapter,subject to the
general conditions and multifamily-specific conditions applicable to uses in the RPUD District.
Section 78-1. Defmitions.
The following words,terms and phrases,when used in this chapter, shall have the meanings ascribed to
them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning. Unless specifically
defined in this section,the words and phrases used in this chapter shall have the meanings given to them
in Chapter 82.
"Assisted living facilities"(nursing home,rest home)means housing designed for invalid,infirmed, aged,
convalescent or physically or mentally disabled persons who need assistance with their daily living needs,
including special support services such as meal preparation,housekeeping,personal nursing care,etc.,but
not including hospitals, clinics, sanitariums or similar institutions, and not including residential treatment.
Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment subject to conditions specified by the Planning
Commission.
Kang noted Staff defines assisted living facilities as five or more persons,and asked whether the City
Attorney has made any recommendations regarding the number of people that would be allowed in that
type of facility.
Gaffron indicated the City Attorney did not make any recommendations in that regard.
Kang stated she would like to see that reviewed by the City Attorney.
Schoenzeit asked where the RPUD districts in the City.
Gaffron indicated the RPUD districts would need to be created by the City regarding a specific
application that requests the rezoning. The City has not taken any areas of the City and rezoned them to
RPUD without having a specific application for a specific property.
Page 3
� ,� ,
,
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,June 21,2010
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(#10-3473 CITY OF ORONO,AMENDMENT TO 78-624,RPUD CONDITIONAL USES,CONT)
Gaffron stated any time the City would like to create an RPUD,it would be a rezoning from the existing
standards to an RPUD,which gives the Planning Commission and City Council some latitude in imposing
additional standards. Gaffron indicated the entire Stonebay project was an RPUD project,the senior
living facility was an RPUD project,and the Orono Woods project was also an RPUD project but was
never rezoned. Gaffron noted the RPUD process is a very specific process for a specific application.
Schoenzeit asked whether the City would still need to go through the public hearing process as part of an
RPUD application.
Gaffron indicated they would.
Leslcinen asked as it relates to the definitions for assisted living,whether the nursing home definition
would become synonymous with the assisted living facility definition.
Gaffron stated the statutory reference would not be included in the Code other than by number reference.
Kang asked as it relates to the residential treatment facilities,if the City Attorney is looking at whether
that is the correct term to be used and whether some examples would be included in the definition
language.
Gaffron stated that could be done or Staff could list certain uses that would be excluded. The City
Attorney has suggested that it is not necessary to list those at the present time.
Kang indicated she would like to see that included. •
Gaffron stated the statutory definitions that perhaps should be included. Staff could spell those
definitions out in the amendment if the Planning Commission feels it is necessary.
Feuss commented that as long as the definitions exist by state statute,that it may make sense to
incorporate them into the amendment.
Chair Kang opened the public hearing at 6:50 p.m.
There were no comments regarding this application. �
Chair Kang closed the public hearing at 6:50 p.m.
Kang indicated she does not have any issues with forwarding this application to the City Council as long
as it includes the recommendations made by the Planning Commission.
Schoenzeit concurred that that approach makes sense.
Schoenzeit moved,Feuss seconded,to recommend approval of Application#10-3473,Amendment
to Zoning Code Section 78-624, adding��assisted living facilities"to the list of allowed conditional
uses in the Residential Planned Unit Development District,with the recommendations of the
Page 4
� � , �
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,June 21,2010 �
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(#10-3473 CITY OF ORONO,AMENDMENT TO 78-624,RPUD CONDITIONAL USES,CONT)
Planning Commission being available for City Council review for possible inclusion in the final
draft of the amendment. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0. �
*3. #09-3395 RALPH COLT BAGLEY ESTATE, 1105 FERNDALE ROAD WEST,
VARIANCE RENEWAL ,
Kang moved,Schwingler seconded,to recommend approval of Application#09-3395,the Estate of
Ralph Colt Bagley, 1105 Ferndale Road West,granting variances to lot area,lot width,side
setback,lakeshore setback,floodplain setback, and hardcover in the 0-75 foot zone. VOTE:
Ayes 5,Nays 0.
*4. #10-3469 FRANK MASSERANO ON BEAALF OF INTERNATIONAL MINISTERIAL
FELLOWSI�P,2477 SHADYWOOD ROAD
Kang moved,Schwingler seconded,to recommend approval of Application#10-3469,Frank
Masserano on behalf of International Ministerial Fellowship,2477 Shadywood Road, commercial
site plan review and setback variances for the proposed trash enclosure building. VOTE: Ayes 5,
Nays 0. �
5. #10-3470 STEPHEN&PAMELA WII.SON,3508 IVY PLACE,PARTIAL RIGHT-OF-
WAY VACATION,6:53 P.M.—7:39 P.M. �
Pamela Wilson,Applicant,and Kate Kelly,Real Estate Agent,were present.
Turner stated the applicant is requesting partial vacation of the unimproved street right-of-way(fire lane)
that lies between 3508 Ivy Place and 3486 Ivy Place.
The unimproved street right-of-way was created in 1881 as part of the Spring Park subdivision. On the
plat it was named Maple Avenue. In 1885, six lots along Maple Avenue Northwest of the right-of-way
and some additional property were replatted into Taylor's Subdivision of Spring Park Lots. The
applicant's property is 1.S lots in Taylor's Subdivision. This places 3508 and the right-of-way in
different subdivisions. Since they were originally part of the same subdivision,the owner of 3508 has a
potential interest in the right-of-way.
3508 and 3510 Ivy Place functions as one property even though they are two tax parcels. 3508 contains
the primary dwelling,which is located on both tax parcels. 3510 Ivy Place is a small secondary dwelling
located near the roadway on the northerly tax parcel. 3508 was constructed around 1950. 3510 was
added sometime before 1960. � '
The earliest record of encroachment into the right-of-way is in May 1981,when a notice was sent to Mr.
Wilson regarding work he had done in the right-of-way without city permission or permits. The work
included grading that had blocked a culvert and restricted drainage through the right-of-way as well as
tree and brush removal: Neighbors were concerned that access to the lake was being made more difficult.
The grading seems to have been corrected by July 1981.
Page 5
� ,
� ,
' MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,June 21,2010
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(#10-3470 STEPHEN&PAMELA WILSON,3508 IVY PLACE,CONTIlVU�D)
To avoid future problems,the City wanted to lrnow where its property lines were and a survey was then
commenced. Council authorized Staff at that time to draft a resolution that would allow the
encroachments to remain. The City Attorney instead drafted a Covenant and Agreement. A copy was
given to Mr.Wilson in January 1982 for review by his attorney. It contained a provision that the City
would grant a license for the improvements within the unimproved right-of-way as shown on the survey.
However,the record ends at that point. There is no final, signed copy of the agreement in the file.
The property is currently for sale. The title company is requesting assurance that 3508 has legal physical
access to Ivy Place. A potential buyer is requesting assurance that all the improvements in the right-of-
way can remain. Staff offered an encroachment agreement that would allow some of the improvements to
remain but would require the owner to remove them whenever the City requested their removal. This is
the standard form of an encroachment agreement. The proposal was not satisfactory so the owners are
requesting vacation of the portion of the right-of-way that contains the improvements.
The Public works Department indicates that over the years there have been sporadic problems from work
' the Wilsons have done in the right-of-way and that the improvements have actually expanded over the
years.
Planning Staff recommends the application be denied based on:
1. The City uses the entire right-of-way as a part of the storm drainage system. Drainage from Ivy
Place and properties west of Ivy Place flows across it to Lake Minnetonka.
2. The City Engineer has identified a foreseeable City use for the entire right-of-way to address
future state or watershed district storm water management requirements.
3. The public uses the right-of-way to enjoy a view of the lake. If a formal trail were constructed,
the preferable location would be near the middle of the 60-foot right-of-way so there would be
room for buffering between the access users and the adjacent properties.
Turner noted that Staff also does not have detailed topographical information for this area at the present
time to lrnow the best location for a path.
Pamela Wilson,Applicant, stated the house is for sale and that she would like the property to remain the
same as it is at the present time. The public is still able to use the right-of-way and that she is not
requesting permission to construct on that property.
Kate Kelly,Real Estate Agent, stated the prospective buyers do not have any intention of blocking
anyone's view of the lake or constructing anything in the right-of-way. Kelly noted this area consists of a
number of trees and that currently,in her view,no one really has a view of the lake. The owners would
like to reach some type of compromise on the situation.
Kelly stated the April 10,2010, encroachment agreement did not seem similar to the agreement that was
offered in 1981 since it is asking them to remove the patio,the retaining wall,a portion of the driveway,
and the trash enclosure. They would be willing to enter into an encroachment agreement now but they do
Page 6
� � t
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,June 21,2010
6:30 o'clock p.m. �
(#10-3470 STEPHEN&PAMELA WII,SON,3508 IVY PLACE,CONTINUED)
not want to be required to remove those items since it would make it difficult for the owners to sell the
property. The owners are also agreeable to a drainage agreement. The public would still be able to
access the lake the same way as in the past.
Wilson stated she has resided in the property since 1982 and that the use by the public has essentially
remained the same.
Kang asked if there are any drainage issues.
Wilson indicated there are not and that the new culvert has helped with the drainage. Rock has also been
added to help divert the runoff. Wilson commented she would like the property to remain the same.
Feuss stated the applicant has indicated a willingness to negotiate an encroachment agreement and that
perhaps that avenue should be pursued first. .
Kelly stated the 2010 agreement is not the same as the one proposed in 1981 and that they would like to
meet somewhere in the middle. Kelly submitted some color photocopies of the property.
Turner stated Staff was looking for removal of the areas that did not exist in 1981,which include the wall,
the patio, and the trash enclosure. The retaining wall was in existence in 1981.
Wilson noted there have always been some steps going down to the lake.
Schoenzeit asked if the proposed encroachment agreement says that the improvements within the City's
right-of-way are at the property owner's risk.
Turner indicated that is correct. Turner stated it would not be necessary to include the driveway in the
encroachment agreement since access to the property across the City's right-of-way is a permissible use.
' Chair Kang opened the public hearing,at 7:17 p.m. ,
Kathy Wright, 3287 Casco Circle, stated she wanted to get some additional information regarding the
application. Since they moved out to Casco Circle,they were told that you could access the lake,but
pointed out that the property owners attempt to make the public access points hidden. Wright indicated
she did not have any idea what was being discussed in this application,which prompted her to attend
tonight's meeting.
Paul Larson, 3865 Shoreline Drive,indicated he lived at 3225 Casco Circle for seven years. Larson noted s
he is one of the real estate agents on this property. If you look at the survey,you can see that the entire
city street is encroaching on the property across the road. The street is very narrow and elimination of
off-street parking does not make sense since it would create a safety hazard. The 2010 encroachment
agreement requires the removal of the concrete steps,the patio,and the trash enclosure. This is a walkout
rambler and is in need of improvement. �
Page 7
� ,
� �.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,June 21,2010
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(#10-3470 STEPHEN&PAMELA WII,SON,3508 IVY PLACE, CONTINiTED)
Larson stated they are not asking the City to relinquish any of their easements and that there is still plenty
of good access for the public. There are also several other neighborhood parks in the Casco Circle and
Casco Point area. Larson requested the Planning Commission grant the vacation,which would help clean
up the title. In addition,there is also the liability of people pazking on city land that should be considered.
Patrick Neuville, 3271 Casco Circle, stated he has lost two pieces of land due to the new Ivy Lane but he
is still paying property taxes on that land. Neuville stated he does have legal access to the lake via the fire
lane. Neuville stated he does not have an issue with the driveway but he does have an issue with allowing
someone to take over the fire lane and allowing someone to build within the right-of-way without
obtaining a permit first. Neuville stated in his view all of those structures within the fire lane should be
' removed.
Mary Drazan, 3546 Ivy Place, asked if this is a conforming or nonconforming lot.
Turner indicated it is nonconforming due to the size of the lot and width of the lot.
Drazan stated they just constructed a new home on their property two years ago and that they did obtain a
variance due to the narrowness of the street. They conformed as much as possible with the City's
regulations and that she has a problem with allowing someone to obtain some land simply because they
constructed some structures within the fire lane. Drazan indicated they have an eight-foot driveway and
that they have to work with it. Limited parking is not a reason to grant the variance.
Drazan indicated she also has an issue with people who will benefit from the sale of the property speaking
in support of the vacation.
Kate Kelly stated she has resided on Casco Point for a number of years when she was younger and that
her parents still currently live there but that she currently lives in Minnetrista. The property owners
would be agreeable to working out an encroachment agreement but that they are unable to sell the
property with the title in its current status. The Wilsons would like to sell the property but are unable to
due to that issue.
Chair Kang closed the public hearing at 7:27 p.m.
Feuss stated in her view the appropriate method would be to negotiate an acceptable encroachment
agreement and that she does not see why the City would relinquish its rights to the fire lane and right-of-
way.
Kang commented that she has some difficulty with the vacation since there were some structures added
without obtaining City pernussion.
Turner stated the encroachment agreement could spell out exactly what can remain and what needs to be
removed. Turner noted the encroachments have increased since 1981.
Kang commented the additions since 1981 are an issue and that she would be in favor of an encroachment
agreement that would allow what existed in 1981.
Page 8
' f ,
R
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANI�ING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,June 21,2010 '
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(#10-3470 STEPAEN&PAMELA WILSON,3508 IVY PLACE,CONTINUED)
Curtis noted the survey does depict what existed in 1981.
Turner stated the agreement references the survey and lists specific items that would be allowed. The
sidewalk was added after 1981.
Kang commented she wants to be very clear on what existed in 1981.
Schwingler noted the 1981 encroachment agreement was never signed and executed.
_ Leskinen asked whether the adjacent property owner has commented on the application since they are on
the other side of the fire lane. ° .
Turner indicated the City has not heard from that property owner.
David Owen,the property owner,identified himself and asked to speak.
Chair Kang reopened the public hearing at 7:30 p.m.
David Owen, 3486 Ivy Place, asked what would happen to future construction if the fire lane is vacated
and given to the Wilsons.
Curtis stated it would increase the Wilsons' building area.
Turner indicated it would be counted as lot area for the Wilsons unless there was a covenant or easement
placed over that land.
Owen stated they do have a concern with that given the impact on the setbacks that it would have. �
Chair Kang closed the public hearing at 7:32 p.m.
Schoenzeit stated in his view it appears the vacation would set a dangerous precedent and that they should
perhaps consider entering into an encroachment agreement.
Leskinen indicated she is in agreement with an encroachment agreement and that some of the items that
have been added over the years without City permission should be removed.
Kang noted the applicant can still approach the City Council regarding the vacation if the Planning
Commission recoxnmends denial.
Kelly stated it would be expensive to remove all of the structures and that they are entitled to have a
stairway down to the lake. If the encroachment agreement would allow them to retain what is currently
there,they would not have a problem with that. The new buyers are not interested in building in that area
but would like some assurance that the driveway and the stairway will remain.
Wilson commented if the stairway and retaining wall are removed, it would result in erosion.
Page 9
' � � �
NIINUTES OF THE �
ORONO PLANNII�TG CONIlVIISSION MEETING '
Monday,June 21,2010
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(#10-3470 STEPHEN&PAMELA WILSON,3508 IVY PLACE,CONTINUED)
Kang asked if the property owners are agreeable to removing whatever did not exist in 1981.
Schoenzeit stated negotiation of the encroachment agreement should be between the applicant and Staff.
Turner noted the application tonight is simply for the vacation. '
Schoenzeit moved,Kang seconded,to recommend denial of Application#10-3470,Stephen and
Pamela Wilson,3508 Ivy Place,partial right-of-way vacation. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
Turner noted this application will be going before the City Council the second week in July.
Schoenzeit encouraged the applicant to speak with City Staff to see whether an agreement can be reached.
Turner recommended the applicants submit an agreement for Staff to respond to and that the
encroachment agreement would need to be approved by the City Council.
, 6. #10-3472 WELSH SEIVIOR HOUSING,875 WAYZATA BOULEVARD WEST,
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT,RPUD REZOI�TING,CONCEPT PLAN APPROVAL
AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT,7:39 P.M.—8:12 P.M.
Bob Erickson,Welsh Companies; Brian Luman,Architect;Mike Schrade,Construction Manager; and
Steve Johnston,Civil Engineer,were present.
Curtis stated the applicant is requesting approvals in order to develop 875 Wayzata Boulevard West. The
proposal includes a 55-unit assisted living and memory care facility consisting of 25 assisted living units,
10 enhanced assisted living units, and 20 memory care units.
The applicant is requesting a comprehensive plan amendment to allow a single,two-story building with a
footprint of 27,385 square feet,a residential planned unit development conditional use permit,rezoning
and concept plan approval to allow a 55-unit assisted living facility. The applicant is proposing an overall
density of 8.4 units per buildable acre,which conforms to the 2010-2030 CMP guiding of this property.
The current language in the 2010-2030 Community Management Plan states that the site may be
developed at a density of 10-15 units per net acre with a maximum structural coverage of 20,000 square
feet. The applicant is proposing a 27,835 square foot,two-story building. The second floor is proposed
to be slightly smaller than the main floor in order to reduce building mass. �
Staff believes that the applicant's proposed use of the property fits philosophically with the intent of the
RPUD district,but the proposed use does not conform totally to the definition of"multifamily"as listed
within the allowed uses of the RPUD district. Nursing homes are listed as a conditional use only within
the B-4 and RR-1B districts. Under the RR-1B district standards,the applicant would be limited to a
density of one unit per 2 acres,which results in the proposed 55-units not being feasible for this site. As a
result, a code amendment is being considered by the Planning Commission which would allow"assisted
living facilities"as a conditional use under the RPUD district.
Page
10
l �
� �
S
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,June 21,2010
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(#10-3472 WELSH SEIVIOR HOUSING,875 WAYZATA BOULEVARD WEST, CONTINUED)
The Planning Commission should review the applicant's proposal in light of the following conditions:
1. Is the proposal consistent with the Community Management Plan;
2. Compliance with the zoning code,including any conditions imposed on specific uses as required
by Article V,Division 3 of the City Code;
3. Adequately served by police, fire,roads, and storm water management;
4. Provided with an adequate water supply and sewage disposal system;
5. Not expected to generate excessive demand for public services at public cost;
6. Compatible with the surrounding area as used both presently and as it is planned to be used in the
future;
7. Consistent with the character of the surrounding area,unless a change of character is called for in
the Community Management Plan;
. 8. Compatible with the character of buildings and site improvements in the surrounding area,unless
a change of character is called for in the Community Management Plan; ,
9. Not expected to substantially impair the use and enjoyment of the property in the area or have a .
materially adverse impact on the property values in the area when compared to the impairment or
impact of generally permitted uses;
10. Provided with screening and buffering adequate to mitigate undesirable views and activities likely
to disturb surrounding uses;
11. Not create a nuisance which generates smoke,noise, glare,vibration, odors,fumes, dust,
electrical interference, general unsightliness,or other issues; ,
12. Not cause excessive non-residential txaffic on residential streets,parlcing needs that cause an
inconvenience to adjoining properties,traffic congestion,or unsafe access;
13. Designed to take into account the natural,scenic, and historic features of the area and to minimize
environmental impact;
14. All exterior lighting shall be so directed so as not to cast glare toward or onto the public right-of- .
way or neighboring residential uses or districts;
15. Not detrimental to the public health,public safety,or general welfare.
Page
11
1 �
1 �.
. MINUTES OF THE
� ORONO PLANNING COMIVIISSION MEETING
Monday,June 21,2010
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(#10-3472 WELSH SElVIOR HOUSING,875 WAYZATA BOULEVARD WEST,CONTINUED)
Because the proposal is for a multi-unit residential development guided for urban density(greater than
one unit per two acres)the project is subject to the requirements of Orono's Conservation Design
Ordinance. The applicant will be required to prepare a Conservation Design Master Plan for the site.
The Planning Commission should take into account the property is at a location highly visible to traffic
entering Orono from the east. Development at this site might be considered as a `main entrance' to
Orono, and as such will inherently set a tone for the character of the City. Therefore, a visually low-
intensity use of the site should be strived for.
In addition,the property abuts the Luce Line Trail. The development of a 50-unit residential building
rather than nine individual buildings is anticipated to result in a more compact, centered footprint,not as '
spread out as the previously approved nine single-family homes. This has a potential to then retain more
of the long views to the southwest enjoyed by trail users,given that those views are now of a freeway and '
railroad corridor. Due to the trail crossing of the freeway immediately west of the property,this is one of
,the very few locations in Orono traversed by the trail where denser development might not seem out of
place. �
The Planning Commission should also consider the following:
1. Compatibility of the proposed plan with the RPUD standards and consistency with the goals,
policies, and objectives of the comprehensive plan and surface water management plan;
2. Preservation of the site in its natural state to the greatest extent practical by minimizing tree and
soil removal and designing grade changes to be in keeping with the general character and
appearance of neighboring properties;
3. Creation of compatible relationships between buildings and open spaces both on the site and
adjacent to it, incorporating natural site features and with existing and future buildings having a
, visual relationship to the development,with special consideration being given to:
a. An internal sense of order for the buildings and uses on the site and provision of a
desirable environment for occupants,visitors, and the general community;
b. The amount and location of open space and landscaping;
c. Materials,textures,colors, and details of construction as an expression of the design
concept and the compatibility of the same with the adjacent and neighboring structures
and uses; and vehicular and pedestrian circulation,including walkways,interior drives
� and parlcing in terms of location and number access points to the public streets,width of
interior drives and access points,general interior circulation, separation of pedestrian and
vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of parking.
4. Promotion of energy conservation through design,location, orientation and elevation of
structures,the use and location of glass in structures and the use of landscape materials and site
grading;
Page
1z
� �� � f
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,June 21,2010
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(#10-3472 WELSH SEIVIOR HOUSING,875 WAYZATA BOULEVARD WEST, CONTINUED)
5. Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provisions for surface water
drainage, sound and sight buffers,preservation of views,light and air and those aspects of design
not adequately covered by other regulations which may have substantial effects on neighboring
land uses;
6. The Planning Commission and City Council may attach such conditions to their actions as they
determine necessary to convenient to better accomplish the purposes of the City Code.
Kang asked whether the sewer and water would come from Wayzata.
Curtis indicated it would come from Wayzata.
Feuss noted Staffls recommendation is to table this application until July.
Curtis indicated some of Staff's requests have been addressed by the applicant and that the Planning
Commission should give some parameters that they would like the applicant to address. Curtis noted that
some of the information would be submitted with the Master Plan,which Staff is fine with.
Erickson thanked Mike Gaffron for bringing forward the zoning amendment to allow this type of use on
the property.
Brian Lubben,Architect,noted they have completed a market study recently for assisted living facilities
and that the study did demonstrate there is a great need for this type of housing in Orono. Ecumen is
committed to meeting that demographic. The size of the project is 55 units,which consists of 20 memory
care units, 10 enhanced care units,and 25 assisted living units. The total for that size of building is
approximately 26,000 square feet on the main level and 1500 feet for the canopy/front entrance area. The
upper level consists of approximately 20,000 square feet.
The project has been designed in a bungalow style,with stone veneer on the front and siding
incorporated. Steeper roof pitches have been incorporated to give it a ground hugging appearance.
Lubben commented in his view it will blend in well with the City of Orono. Lubben noted they will be
redesigning the dormers to meet the City's height restrictions.
The property is heavily wooded on all sides and during the summer the building will be fairly well
concealed. Lubben illustrated a 3-D version of the building. The building pushes up against the Luce
Line Trail and fits within the wetland buffer areas and other constraints on the site.
Lubben indicated there are a number of amenities to the project,including a community room,a chapel,a
_ library, a conference room,main dining room and separate memory care dining room,private dining
room on the west side of the building,a salon and spa, and a card room. Throughout the building there
are eight foot wide corridors and two large elevators that will hold seven or eight people at a time. There
are also storage areas for the residents,a set of offices,several nurses' stations, a staff room, staff lounge,
laundry facilities, and loading dock. The building also contains a sprinkler system. Lubben pointed out
there is also a terrace on the west side of the building and a balcony off of the card room.
Page
13
e �� , �
�.
" MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING CONIlVIISSION MEETING
Monday,June 21,2010
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(#10-3472 WELSH SEPTIOR HOUSING,875 WAYZATA BOULEVARD WEST,CONTINUED)
Lubben stated they have attempted to make this a high-quality project with some features that are unique
to Orono. Lubben provided samples of the building materials.
Feuss asked what a memory garden is.
Lubben indicated it is a garden for the memory care residents.
Erickson stated the public works superintendent and fire chief were very helpful and that they have also
spoken with the City Engineer to ensure that they are meeting all of the City's expectations and
requirements for this project. Ecumen is planning on investing$10 million in this project.
Kang asked how many staff personnel will be there at different points of the day.
Erickson stated the staff would rotate in and out on various shifts and that the maximum daytime
personnel would be approximately 18. The maj ority of the residents do not drive and that the parking
demand by the staff and visitors would be limited. Erickson stated in his view there is an ample amount
of parking stalls available in the event of special events.
Feuss asked how many residents are anticipated.
Erickson stated the maj ority of the units would be occupied by a single resident but that there would be a
limited number of two bedroom units. Erickson stated they would be glad to offer a tour of their
Lakeville facility,which just recently opened,and that they have recently received approval for a 120-unit
facility in Blaine.
Schwingler asked if there are any guest bedrooms available. `
Erickson stated they do not have any guest bedrooms planned for at the present time at that facility.
Those are provided in an independent living situation. There are two guest bedrooms at the facility in
Lakeville.
Kang asked whether Orono would be providing the fire and police protection.
Curtis indicated it would be the City of Orono/Long Lake providing the police and fire protection.
Kang asked if there will be a roundabout constructed in this area.
Gaffron stated the roundabout is in the area of the intersection of Old Wayzata Boulevard and Old
Highway 12. If the roundabout is constructed,the left turn would be eliminated. Gaffron indicated he is
skeptical whether that will be constructed in the immediate future and that it more likely will not be
constructed for a number of years.
Kang commented that the plan appears to be very well thought out and that she does not have any major
concerns regarding the application. Kang commented the significant amount of trees in the area will help
Page
14
� i
f �� �
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,June 21,2010
6:30 o'clock p.m. �
(#10-3472 WELSH SENIOR HOUSING,875 WAYZATA BOULEVARD WEST,CONTINUED)
shield the building in the summer and that the low profile of the building will also help with the massing �
of the building.
Kang asked what exterior lighting is being proposed.
Lubben stated there will be some pole fixtures in the parking lot and then some entrance lighting on the
entrances and exits to the building and driveway.
Kang opened the public hearing at 8:05 p.m.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Kang closed the public hearing at 8:05 p.m.
Feuss noted the Community Management Plan has a maximum structural coverage of 20,000 square feet
and that Staff's reports states the site analysis of the proposal meets all of the requirements. Feuss asked
how that is reconciled.
Curtis stated the Comprehensive Plan Amendment in 2009 to allow for the 20,000 square footprint was
based on the Orono Villas approval,which was a series of stand-alone townhomes. The 20,000 square
feet was included in the amendment in an attempt to keep the massing small and that Staff used that as a
guide. Staff feels the property is large enough to accommodate the proposed square footage.
Gaffron noted there were nine units approved for that other project and that one of the items that supports
this request is the configuration of the building,which reduces the profile from any direction. Gaffron
stated in his view the building is low profile and meets the intent of what the City was attempting to reach
with the square footage number.
Schwingler asked about the rain garden.
Curtis stated the applicant has provided information on the rain garden today and that there is a previous
wetland delineation on file. The City Engineer did not have any issue with what was being proposed and
that additional detailed information will be provided for the master plan application.
Kang moved,Feuss seconded,to recommend approval of Application#10-3472,Welsh Senior
Housing,875 Wayzata Boulevard West, Comprehensive Plan Amendment,RPUD Rezoning,
Concept Plan Approval and Conditional Use Permit. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
*7. #10-3474 JAMES AND JUDITH PIERPONT, 1801 WEST FARM ROAD,PARTIAL
EASEMENT VACATION
Kang moved,Schwingler seconded to recommend approval of Application#10-3474,James and
Judith Pierpont, 1801 West Farm Road,granting of a partial vacation of a drainage and utility
easement. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0. �
Page
15
1 �`
� � � !
MINUTES OF TIiE
ORONO PLANIVING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,June 21,2010
6:30 o'clock p.m.
8. #10-3475 JUDSON DAYTON,825 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD,VARIANCE,8:12 P.M.
—8:27 P.M.
John Winston,Attorney-at-Law;Judson Dayton,Applicant; and Mark Crronberg, Surveyor; John Adams,
Realtor,were present. ,
Curtis stated the applicant is requesting average lakeshore setback variances to proposed Lot 1 and Lot 2
of the newly approved preliminary plat. ,
The location of proposed Lot 1 is directly within the average lakeshore setback of the home at 3051
Farview Lane. However,the topography of proposed Lot 1 and the orientation of the home at 3051 are
such that there are little to no lake views over proposed Lot 1 from 3051. As Lot 1 is located entirely
within the average lakeshore setback of 3051 Farview Lane variances will be required at the time of the
construction of a new home. The applicant would like to address this average lakeshore setback issue
prior to the sale of the property.
The existing home on Lot 2 is located 200 feet from the OHWL. The applicant suggests that allowing
future new home to be built on the property at the 75-foot setback would not adversely affect views of the
lake enjoyed from homes on proposed Lot 1 or Lot 3.
The applicant has requested variances to allow homes to be consiructed on proposed Lot 1 and Lot 2 up to
the 75-foot setback. It is the applicant's intent that Lot 3 will conform to an average lakeshore setback
line between proposed Lot 2 and the adjacent home at 2865 Little Orchard Way.
Based on the location of the two adjacent homes,the permitted location of a home on proposed Lot 1
would be nearly 600 feet from the lakeshore. This location would likely have no lake views and would
potentially impact septic treatment areas. A home on proposed Lot 1 that is located 75 and 300 feet from
the OHWL would allow the site's natural drainage-way to remain rather than altering the grade,removing
numerous trees and moving considerable amounts of earth to push the home farther from the lake.
The shoreline curves slightly;none of the proposed lots would appear to impact views of the lake from
the other. Proposed Lot 3 would maintain the average lakeshore setback as deternuned by the home on
the adjacent lot on Little Orchard Way and proposed Lot 2. Due to the large lot sizes, orientation of the
lots in relation to each other and the lots' orientation to the lakeshore,the applicant's request to allow
homes to be constructed up to the 75-foot setback on proposed Lot l and Lot 2 may be reasonable.
Placing homes in the applicant's suggested located do not appear to negatively impact the lake views as
enjoyed from adjacent homes. The properties are over four acres in area,heavily wooded, and there are
no anticipated drainage issues with future development of the lots.
Staff recommends approval of the average setback variances for proposed Lot 1 and Lot 2 to allow
construction of new homes up to the 75-foot setback if the Planning Commission deems it appropriate.
Based on the size of the lots and the orientation to the lakeshore, Staff is comfortable recommending
approval of
Feuss asked if on Lot 1 the lake views will not be impacted
Page �
16 •
, „
� ��� �. -
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING "
Monday,June 21,2010
6:30 o'clock p.m.
: (#10-3475 JUDSON DAYTON,825 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD,CONTINUED)
Curtis indicated it does not appear those properties will be impacted and that those neighbors were
' notified of tonight's hearing.
Winston noted this concept has been before the Planning Commission on other occasions and has been
preliminarily approved but was not pursued given the poor market conditions.
Winston stated the affected neighbors are not in attendance tonight and that they are requesting this
evening that the variance be applied to both Lot 1 and Lot 2. The concern was that a future new house on
Lot 2 was arbitrarily set 200 or 300 feet back from the lake and that a potential owrier would not
necessarily construct the house there if it should ever be reconstructed. These are large lots and would be
improved with amenities and landscaping. Winston stated in their view the properties would be able to be
marketed better with the variances. �
� Winston pointed out that the house most comparable with this one is the residence located beyond the
Delaney property and that this proposal is consistent with the location of that particular house. Delaney's
house faces the southwest and not southerly across this lot. Winston stated they do not feel there is any
negative impact to the Delaney house. The other house is located considerably closer to the lake than this
house.
Chair Kang opened the public hearing at 8:20 p.m.
Curtis noted she did receive a phone call this morning from a neighbor regarding the northern driveway
and he was asked whether he had anything specifically to bring to the Planning Commission and he
indicated he did not.
Chair Kang closed the public hearing at 8:21 p.m.
Kang indicated she does not have any problems with the application.
Feuss stated she also does not have any concerns with the application.
Schwingler asked whether the Planning Commission should be concerned about granting variances on
this application without having specific plans for the future homes.
" Curtis indicated Staff feels this is a unique situation and that the elements of the application are such that
Staff would feel comfortable granting approval without seeing a specific plan.
Schoenzeit asked if there are any restrictions that structures cannot be placed closer to the lake than the
75-foot setback line.
Curtis indicated that could be part of the Planning Commission's recommendation.
� Schoenzeit stated he would like to see sufficient language in the variances restricting structures closer
than 75 feet to the lake. �
Winston stated that would be acceptable.
Page
17
� ��
� "� .
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,June 21,2010
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(#10-3475 JUDSON DAYTON,825 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD,CONTINUED)
Schoenzeit indicated that language would make him more comfortable with granting the variances
without seeing a specific plan. �
Gaffron stated historically that type of language has been included in resolutions.
Kang moved,Schoenzeit seconded,to recommend approval of Application#10-3475,Judson
Dayton,825 Old Crystal Bay Road South,granting of average setback variances for Lot 1 and Lot
2,subject to the condition that no encroachments will be allowed within the 0-75 foot setback.
VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0. �
9. #10-3454 CITY OF ORONO,AMENDMENTS TO ORONO CODE CHAPTER 78,
ARTICLE IV RELATING TO CONDITIONAL USES IN RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS,
8:27 P.M.—8:35 P.M. °
Turner stated the City is proposing a zoning code amendment which would revise conditional uses in the
residential zoning districts. The Planning Commission has reviewed the conditional uses allowed in the
residential zoning districts and found that some of the uses are out o date and difficult to understand,
some need additional controls,some are more appropriate as accessory uses,and some are no longer
appropriate at all. .
The major change is to restrict pubic barns and stables,riding academies, stock farms,and commercial
greenhouses to the Rural Residential zoning districts and to restrict gun clubs and outdoor recreational
cubs to the RR-lA district.They are currently allowed as conditional uses in all residential districts. The
Planning Commission judged them to be incompatible with the intents and purposes o the Residential and
Lakeshore Residential zoning districts. The gun club on Sixth Avenue North would become non-
confornung but could continue to operate as is indefinitely. No other existing use is expected to become
non-confornung because of these particular changes.
The tables included in the packet illustrate the uses currently allowed under the code and the changes that
would occur with the amendments. The City Council will also review the list of changes,make any
desired alterations, and then direct the City Attorney to incorporate the changes into the ordinance,which
will be brought to the Council for formal adoption at a subsequent meeting.
Curtis noted that hospitals and nursing homes have been eliminated and will now be covered under the
other proposed amendment heard earlier this evening.
Chair Kang opened the public hearing at 8:32 p.m.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Chair Kang closed the public hearing at 8:32 p.m.
Schoenzeit moved,Leskinen seconded,to recommend approval of Application#10-3454,City of
Orono,Amendments to Orono Code Chapter 78,Article IV,Relating to Conditional Uses in
Residential Zoning Districts. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
Page
18
� �+ ��,� t
MINUTES OF T�
ORONO PLANNING COMNIISSION MEETING
Monday,June 21,2010
6:30 o'clock p.m.
PLANNING COMMISSION COMIVIENTS
10. REPORT OF PLANIVING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES ATTENDING CITY
COUNCIL MEETINGS ON MAY 24,2010,AND JUNE 14,2010
Schoenzeit reported on the May 24,2010, City Council meeting and noted that there was considerable
discussion regarding parking options for the Dakota Trail. The majority of the other items were placed on
the Consent Agenda.
Leslcinen reported on the June 14,2010, City Council meeting and noted that the majority of the items
were placed on the Consent Agenda. Leskinen stated Bonestroo gave a presentation on their Infraseek
software. -
Leskinen stated as part of the public comment portion,there were a couple of neighbors from Crystal Bay
Road with concerns regarding through traffic on that street and that the residents asked the City Council
to consider vacating the right-of-way to allow them to make it a private road.
11. OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION
Curtis stated she did speak with Jaye Ann Bennett,who indicated her business is currently requiring her
to spend more time traveling and that she has requested to be placed as an alternate on the Planning
Commission. Curtis noted Tess Rice has resigned from the Planning Commission.
12. SELECTION OF REPRESENTATIVES TO ATTEND CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ON
JUNE 28,2010,AND JULY 12,2010
June 28,2010-Kang .
July 12,2010 -Feuss
ADJOURNMENT
Kang moved,Schoenzeit seconded,to ad'ourn the Orono Planning Commission meeting at 8:45
p.m. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0. , �
�� �
Kim Kang, C r
Page '
` 19