HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/21/2011 Planning Commission Minutes ._. ,
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,March Zl,2011
6:30 o'clock p.m.
ROLL CALL
The Orono Planning Commission met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present:
Acting Chair Denise Leskinen, Commissioners Linda Feuss,John Thiesse,and Hue Alexander.
Representing Staff were Assistant City Administrator for Long-Term Strategic Planning Mike Gaffron,
and Recorder Jackie Young. Mayor Tod McMillan was present. Commissioner Jon Schwingler amved
at 6:33 p.m.
Acting Chair Leskinen called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.
CONSENT AGENDA
Thiesse moved,Feuss seconded,to approve the Consent Agenda as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 4,
Nays 0.
*1. APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OF
FEBRUARY 22,2011
Thiesse moved,Feuss seconded,to approve the minutes of the Orono Planning Commission meeting
of February 22,2011,as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 0.
*2. APPROVAL OF JOINT COUNCIL &PC WORK SESSION MINUTES OF
MARCH 2,2011 �
Thiesse moved,Feuss seconded,to approve the minutes of the Joint City Council and Planning
Commission Work Session minutes of March 2,2011, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 0:
Feuss recommended that Item No.4 be heard before Item No. 3.
Thiesse asked how they would be able to issue a conditional use permit for Item No. 4 if it is approved
when they have not heard Item No. 3.
Feuss stated based on the fact that the parking is already over the limit under the conditional use permit,
that should not be a problem.
Gaffron stated the existing conditional use permit code language allows tlie Planning Commission to
establish whatever conditions are appropriate, so whether Item No. 3 is heard first or later,the conditions
would still apply to Item No. 4. During both Items 3 and 4, the Planning Commission will have a
discussion about what are appropriate conditions.
Feuss indicated she does not want the Planning Commission to be influenced on Item No. 3 by the fact
that there is an outstanding application.
Gaffron stated he does not have a preference either way.
.
It was the consensus of the Planning Commission to hear Item No. 4 before Item No. 3.
� Page 1
� MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,March 21,2011
6:30 o'clock p.m.
NEW BUSINESS
4. #11-3501 LUKE KUJAWA ON BEHALF OF MG KAMINSKI, 1444 SHORELINE
DRIVE,YOUR BOAT CLUB,LLCBROWNS BAY,LLC, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT,6:35
PM.—7:48 P.M.
Luke Kujawa,Applicant,was present.
Gaffron stated boat clubs are a conditional use in the B-2 District. The applicant is requesting a
conditional use pernut to allow the operation of a boat club from the marina property located at 1444
Shoreline Drive.
Brown's Bay,LLC, currently operates a slip rental operation at the site. Marine Max, as a tenant of
Brown's Bay,LLC,has operated a boat sales business at the site within the past two years, although the
future of that operation is unlrnown. Your Boat Club has indicated it does not require retail space for its
operation but may lease space in the adjacent residentially zoned building at 1440 Shoreline Drive for
residential purposes.
The current marina operation without the boat club use is slightly short on required parking as calculated
by Staff,based on an estimate of four employees parking on site. A portion of the parking in on property
not owned in common with the marina.
Staff recommends the conditional use pernut only be approved if it contains some numerical standards by
which compliance with the requirement for adequate parking can be measured and if the proposed use can
be shown to meet those standards.
The conditional use permit should be approved only upon resolution of the separate ownership issue via
legal combination,rezoning,parking easement, or some other means acceptable to the City Attorney.
The conditional use permit should be approved only upon resolution of the separate ownership issue via
legal combination,rezoning,parking easement, or some other means acceptable to the City Attorney.
Gaffron stated the only standard for boat club CUPS within the.zoning code is"demonstration that
adequate parking is available on the parking." The pertinent B-2 parking standards required that off-street
parking facilities for a marina operation be sufficient to eliminate any traffic or parking congestion likely
to be caused by the business conducted. The parking areas o not need to be paved but must be provided
with appropriate storm water runoff quality/quantity controls.
When it was completely renovated in 1990,this marina had 18 slips on the water. The prior owner has
since reduced the number of slips to 98. In terms of numerical parking requirements, existing code
standards in Section 78-668 pertinent to this marina site include:
1. Six parking spaces shall be provided for each ten boat slips on water or on land. Provision of six
parking stalls per each 10 slips equals 58.8 stalls.
2. At least eight off-street parlcing spaces,plus one additional space for each 800 square feet of floor
area over 1,000 feet,including warehousing, and all outside sales and storage areas related to the
Page 2
MINUTES OF TAE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,March 21,2011
6:30 o'clock p.m.
sales and service functions.
3. Employee parlcing spaces shall be in addition to the parking spaces required in subsections 1-7 of
this section. The number of employees parking spaces shall be designated on an official
parking plan to be kept on file with the City.
4. Where these minimum parking requirements prove to be inadequate for a given use, additional
Parking may be required in order to continue that use.
The Planning Commission viewed the layout of the marina and boat slips on the overhead.
The applicant has indicated that an additional eight stalls are available in the triangular area on the
Browns Bay side of CR 15 just north of the gazebo. The City has never recognized this area as usable
parking. It was previously allowed only for temporary boat storage and was required to be separated from
CR 15 by wood posts with a rope barrier.
Feuss noted on the side of Taniger Lake,there are 26 parldng stalls that are apparently part of a residential
area and 21 that are part of the business. Feuss noted that currently there is no evidence before the
Planning Commission that the residential sites are part of the business.
Gaffron indicated the City lrnows of no evidence other than the historical use of those residential lots for
parking.
Feuss stated if those residential parking stalls are not considered,the marina would be short 26 spaces.
Gaffron stated if that were the case, Staff would have a huge issue with that. ' ,
Feuss indicated unless there is some evidence that those spaces are available to the marina, she has an
issue with the application and that the existing use is not compliant.
Gaffron commented that the City has become aware that those two lots have come under separate
ownership. Gaffron stated a parking agreement or an easement or combining the two properties under
one property would all be options.
� Schwingler asked if the City lrnows when those two residential lots came under di�ferent ownership.
Gaffron indicated Staff would be able to find out that exact information but that it was approximately
three years ago. � �
Kujawa indicated that is correct. Kujawa noted those two residential lots are still owned by the same � �
person but they consist of two LLCs. Kujawa indicated he has been informed recently that there is a
parking easement over those two lots.
Gaffron stated Staff will need a copy of that easement. Gaffron noted the current code does not specify
the number of stalls required for the boat club use and merely says that the applicant needs to prove to the
City that the parking is adequate. From Staff s perspective, absent a numerical incremental code standard
for required parking for boat clubs,the current parking is short by one to two stalls for just the marina use
as it stands today.
Page 3
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMIVIISSION MEETING
Monday,March 21,2011
6:30 o'clock p.m.
It is Staff s position,on the advice of the City Attorney,that a mere determination of parking adequacy
without applying some numerical conditions will not be legally defensible later on if parking becomes an
issue. Numerical conditions must include the number of boat club boats allowed and the number of stalls
required per boat or based on boat capacity. Without such conditions attached to the CUP,if the boat
club operation expands or changes in the future and parking becomes an issue,the applicants or their
successors might argue that"you found it adequate before without any limits, and my CUP has no
limitations, so you can't stop me." At that point the City would likely have to rely on its marina licensing
program for relie£
Gaffron stated the Planning Commission should deternune whether the applicant's boat club operation as
proposed as demonstrated that adequate parking is available on the site.
Feuss noted that if there is an objective numerical standard for parking for the marina use,which the
. � marina is not currently meeting, and then there is an application for a boat club,it would be fair.to say
that the marina is not meeting the parlcing requirements even without a numerical standard for boat clubs.
Gaffron stated since it appears that the marina is one or two stalls short of the parking requirements for
the marina use,they would need to show more than .06 stalls per boat,which would result in them being
significantly more than one or two stalls short. '
Feuss pointed out that the marina is also 26 stalls short if the parking on the residential lots is not
included.
Gaffron concurred that until the City lrnows for sure that those residential parking stalls are tied in with
the marina,it would be considered a significant shortage.
Gaffron requested the Planning Commission consider the following:
1. Should a boat club CUP be issued when the number of available stalls is already slightly below
the number required by code for just the marina use?
2. Is there any justification to allow parking in the eight additional stalls in the triangle area east of
CR 15? •
3. What numerical parking standards are appropriate for the boat club use? Should it be based on
• total boat capacity or simply on the number of club boats? Should there be a limit on the
number of club boats? Can the proposed club use meet whatever standard the Planning
Commission deternunes is appropriate?
4. Should the CUP be issued without a resolution to the noted ownership issue?
Luke Kujawa stated as a marina operator or boat club operator, one of the basic services they provide is
parking. If a marina tenant cannot pull up within a short distance and get on their boat,they will not
belong to that marina anymore. The marina provides adequate parking for their customers,and in the last
20 years there have not been any issues with parking. The patrons are not allowed to park on the road
currently, and if parking does become an issue,the marina would have to take steps to set up a shuttle or
find parking elsewhere close to the marina.
Page 4
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,March 21,2011
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Kujawa commented he is frustrated by this process since it is now going on ten months since he first
started working on this proposal. One of the first things Planner Gaffron said to him is that this is a
poorly written and ambiguous code. Changing the code by placing an arbitrary number for parldng on
boat clubs is not a good solution. Kujawa stated it feels like some of these issues should have been
discovered during the issuance of the marina permits over the past five years and,should not be part of
this CUP application.
In addition,Planner Gaffron indicated he spent hours searching the entire nation for instances where
parking restrictions were placed on boat clubs separate from marinas and he was not able to find any. �
Boat clubs have been on Lake Minnetonka for the last 20 years and not a single municipality in the entire
country that feels they need different parking standards for boat clubs versus marinas. Orono is proposing
something different that he has to comply with because a boat club has been separated out from a marina.
Feuss noted that issue is not before the Planning Commission at this point.
Kujawa stated they are essentially out of time on this application since the ice is almost off the lake.
Currently there are no parking requirements for boat clubs and they just need to demonstrate adequate
parking. A number of people at the last meeting have indicated there have not been any parking issues in
over 20 years. Kujawa stated there are multiple ways to mitigate parking if issues do arise. Currently
there is no parking allowed on any of the adjacent roads and cars will be ticketed and towed. If the
marina does not provide parking,they will lose customers,which will,in turn, eliminate the need for so
much parking.
Kujawa indicated the residential areas have been used for parking for years. If that is not allowed,the
patrons will be parking on the other side of the road,which will require people to cross the road. Kujawa
stated in his opinion that parking area is very important and should be recognized. Planner Gaffron did
raise the issue of what it could be used for in the future.
Kujawa pointed out that on the busiest days for the marina,the commercial building is not open, so those
spots dedicated to the commercial buildirig are also open for marina parking. Kujawa commented he is
unsure why the City of Orono needs to have numerical parking standards for boat clubs when no one else
in the country does. Kujawa questioned how they could not be meeting the parking requirements when
there have not been any issues.
Kujawa noted the City currently does have a mechanism to manage parking,which is the annual marina
applications or permits. A boat club cannot operate without the marina and vice versa. Kujawa stated in
his opinion there are currently regulations in place that will handle the parking issues.
Kujawa stated the two residential parcels are owned by the same person and that he understands the need
for the City to see evidence of that. Kujawa indicated he has just recently found out that there is a parking
easement in place. Kujawa asked if it has been since 1995 that the marina has been allowed to use that
, area for parking.
Gaffron stated construction of the marina was predicated on those stalls being used for this marina,which
means there was approval by the City for that to happen. At that time the two residential lots were owned
� by the same entity.
Page 5
MINUTES OF THE �
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,March 21,2011
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Feuss pointed out they are now owned by two separate LLCs consisting of one owner.
Kujawa stated they have the same owner.
Feuss stated the City needs some evidence that those 26 stalls are available.
Kujawa indicated the owner is willing to provide that but is currently out of town. Kujawa stated he does
not feel that should be addressed as part of this CUP application and that it should be addressed in the
annual permit application.
In addition,the Marine Max building has five slips. If the building requires 11 spots,the City needs to
give credit for those spots,which creates three additional parking spots. Many of the marinas on the lake
have more parking than necessary. Kujawa indicated that even on the busiest days,the gravel lots by the
two houses are pretty much wide open.
Kujawa stated he needs to move forward with this application and that he would request the Planning
Commission recommend approval on it so he can go before the City Council. Kujawa indicated he has
members signed up,slips that he has purchased, and employees lined up to start work. In his opinion they
have more than adequately met the parking requirements.
Acting Chair Leskinen opened the public hearing at 6:58 p.m.
Rich Anderson,North Shore Bay and Maxwell Bay Marina,indicated he is currently in the process of
buying back Sailor's World. This will be the�fth marina that they have owned in Orono. At the time he
originally purchased it, it was all owned by Jim Rivers and parking was not an issue.
� Anderson questioned how a business can be run out of there if that is residential property. Anderson
asked if the white house is also residential.
Gaffron indicated both houses are zoned residential.
Anderson stated when the property was purchased from him by MG Kaminski,no parking easement was
in place between the two entities and the marina. Anderson indicated they did not rent out any of those
buildings when they owned the place and they ran it strictly as a marina with a sales office. Now the
current owner is trying to rent it out to a boat club,which does not make sense.
Feuss stated to her understanding the use of the residential properties is not part of this application
tonight.
Gaffron stated the application specifically states that while an employee of the boat club or some other
person may use that residential property,they cannot operate a business out of there and they cannot have
signage. The only commercial use the City has ever allowed in that area is parking.
Feuss reiterated that it is her understanding that issue is not before the Planning Commission and would
have to be part of a separate application.
Anderson noted Marine Max rents out the entire building and that last year the boat club operated its
business out of a pickup with a camper on the back.
Page 6
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING CONIlVIISSION MEETING
Monday,March 21,2011 •
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Kujawa indicated that is not true.
Anderson stated in his opinion that is where the business is going to be again this year and the City should
verify that. There is one piece of property that is rented out by Marine Max and there is no room for the
boat club. Anderson indicated the property they are purchasing is approved for a 100 member boat club
and that they have a conditional use permit which requires them to have 25 off-site parking spots.
Anderson pointed out in their case the City does have parking requirements for Sailors World.
Anderson stated the applicant is trying to make the City a scapegoat for not addressing the parking at the
time of the annual licensing. Anderson noted their new property did not have parking established but
they have painted lines in there designating 91 parking stalls. There is no established parking on the other
side. Anderson commented that in the past,if the parking and marina use were not approved and if it was
not in the city ardinance,you could not do it.
Gaffron noted prior to 1995 boat clubs were not addressed as a separate use in the City Code.
Anderson stated they would never dream of doing a 100 member boat club on their site and that he is not .
sure how many members this boat club will have. Anderson commented that he is amazed this site is
being considered for a boat club given the parking issue and the use of the residential properties for a
commercial business.
Feuss asked if it is Sailors World that has the 100 member boat club.
Anderson indicated Sailors World has a conditional use permit that allows them to have a 100 member
boat club but that he would probably not have 100 members.
Feuss asked how many of the boat club members can use the boats at one time.
Anderson stated the City's requirement is .6 for each boat slip,but that it should be one to one or two to
one.
Feuss asked if there is a gap between the times that people can use the boats.
Anderson stated that is a true statement. The boat club average is 150 boating days and that the boats
� will likely be used every one of those days. The .6 ratio is correct for a non-boat club marina. If you
have 80 boat slips,you would need 45 parking stalls. Anderson stated if you have 80 boat slips and they
are all boat club members,you should have 80 parlcing spots.
Feuss noted that issue is not before the Planning Commission right now but that is something the
Planning Commission should look at.
Anderson stated the City has a double standard if it requires them to have 25 off-site parking spots but not
require parking or a conditional use permit for this boat club.
Kujawa stated it was brought up at the last meeting that Sailors World has not had those 25 parking slips
for the last 20 years.
Page 7
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,March 21,2011
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Anderson commented that has nothing to do with anything since it is a conditional use permit.
Chris Hickok, 140 Golden View Drive, Orono, indicated he is in support of the business that is being
discussed tonight and that it would be a good investment in Orono. Hickok indicated this owner has
made some purchases of boats and other investments in the property and that it would be an odd time to
turn down a business. Hickok stated that it makes sense to have the same standard for the boat club and
the marina. Parking was not a problem last year when they were operating out of that location.
Acting Chair Leskinen closed the public hearing at 7:12 p.m.
Feuss stated without verification of the 26 parking stalls,they are out of compliance with Section 78-668,
which in fact contains a numerical requirement for parking. Feuss commented she is not sure why the
City should grant another conditional use permit for this business when it does not meet the parking
requirements. Feuss stated even though the residential parking issue is not before the Planning
Commission tonight, she would like to lrnow whether the residential properties are being used for
commercial use.
Feuss stated in her opinion there should not be separate standards for boat clubs and marinas,but that it is
a discussion that the City needs to have and arrive at some consensus. Feuss indicated she is sympathetic
to businesses and the commitment they have to make,but that the City simply does not have the evidence
in the record that those 26 parking spaces are available.
Schwingler indicated he is in agreement with Commissioner Feuss and that the marina business is vital to
Orono but that there needs to be some consistency among the various marinas. Parking is vital to any
business,particularly the marina business,but the City at this time does not have any evidence the 26
parking stalls are available.
Kujawa asked if a recommendation can be made contingent on that easement being submitted.
Feuss stated she would also like to have some understanding of how the residential properties are being
used prior to a recommendation being made.
Leskinen indicated she also has some concerns regarding the residential component and'the agreement
that allows the parking. Leskinen noted the residential properties could be sold at some point in the future
and asked if there is something currently in place binding the parlcing agreement in the event those
properties were sold.
Gaffron stated there is a city resolution from 1990 that granted a number of different approvals and
variances. The resolution specifically acknowledges that the marina gets credit for those parking stalls on
the residential properties but the resolution does not specify that there shall be an easement in place. It
simply gave credit based on the fact that there was the same owner of both residential properties as well
as the marina.
Gaffron stated the other unusual piece is that a portion of the property located at 1440 east of CR 15 and a
portion of the property located at 1442 east of CR 15 is part of a tax parcel that is split by the road. The
two properties are zoned separately on the east side of the road and separately on the west side of the
road.
Schwingler asked if the triangle shaped lot is zoned residential.
Page 8
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,March 21,2011
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Gaffron indicated that is zoned B-2 commercial and that the portion of the property on the west side of
the road is zoned residential.
Leskinen asked if the wedge parcel is part of those residential properties.
Gaffron indicated it is.
�
Feuss noted if it is sold,there would need to be a separate agreement to allow parking.
Gaffron stated if there is no agreement currently in place and the properties are eventually sold and the
new owner does not wish to allow parking for the marina,that would cause an issue. Gaffron stated the
two houses were zoned residential because the City did not want those two parcels to become part of the
marina at some point.
Gaffron noted the City last year had the boat club signage removed from the residential properties,which
raises the question of whether the boat club needs an actual land-based office to operate out of. Gaffron
indicated it is the City's understanding that Marine Max is not subleasing a portion of the building to
anyone else and that Marine Max is a tenant of MG Kaminski. Gaffron stated whether Kujawa will have
a defined space other than slips is unlrnown. �
Leskinen stated it was her understanding the boat club was run out of the marina and not as a separate
entity,which may not be the case. If it is a separate entity being run out of one of the residential
properties,that raises a whole different issue.
Gaffron asked if the applicant needs a space to operate out of and what space that would be.
Leskinen stated if the boat club has employees,they would need to report to work somewhere.
Kujawa indicated they would basically report to the dock. The house they rented last year was basically
used to store his fishing equipment. Kujawa indicated they do not need a retail operation since they do
not sell anything. There is the possibility that on some evenings they would have people come down to
the gazebo to view the boats. Kujawa indicated he has recently spoken with Marine Max to see if they
could sublease an of�ce in the building if physical space is required and they were told that is an option.
The employees typically meet the members at their car and escort them down to the boat.
Feuss asked how the boats are serviced and maintained.
Kujawa indicated the boats are maintained at one of their off-site locations.
Feuss asked what the employee shifts would be.
Kujawa indicated that would vary but that typically there is one person on site from 8 a.m.until sunset.
They do try to double up employees on the weekends during the busy times. There is no need for a retail
facility or retail office.
Feuss asked if the employees are hourly.
Page 9
� MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANIVING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,March 21,2011
6:30 o'clock p.m.
. Kujawa indicated they both are hourly and salaried.
Feuss asked where the employees go when they are on break.
Kujawa stated they would either go to the gazebo or to Marine Max. Kujawa noted there are restroom �
facilities in the gazebo.
Gaffron pointed out the location of the gazebo on the east side of the road.
Feuss noted the gazebo is located in the B-2 District.
Kujawa stated the gazebo is open to all marina employees. Kujawa asked if the Planning Commission
can approve the conditional use permit if adequate proof is provided on the parking.
Feuss commented she is not sure how they would arrive at 73 parking spaces.
Leskinen asked if a conditional use permit should be issued if the parking is below the requirement.
Alexander stated if the applicant can show that there is an agreement on the parking and he can provide
that,that would be adequate in her view.
Feuss noted there would still be inadequate parking even if the residential parking stalls were taken into
consideration since they would be adding an additional use.
Schwingler pointed out that Marine Max has�ve slips.
Gaffron asked how Marine Max utilizes those slips.
Thiesse commented they can use them anyway they want but that there should be parking for those slips.
Gaffron stated the code does not specify that you reduce the number of parking stalls for boat slips that
are used by the retail operation but that the code does talk about how many stalls are required. Gaffron
commented there might be some leeway in that situation that deserves some additional consideration
depending on how the retail operation is actually using those slips. ,
Alexander noted that four parlcing stalls are required for employees but that the applicant has indicated he
only has one employee typically on site.
Gaffron stated the Planning Commission will need to consider how many employees will be at Marine
Max as well as the number of employees for the boat club.
Feuss stated until the City has some understanding of the compliance with Section 78-668, she is not in
agreement with approving the conditional use permit. .
� Leskinen noted the conditional use permit will also run with the property. �
. Anderson stated he has been in the Orono marina business for a number of years,and that when he
purchased Sailors World,he lrnew they were the only marina with a conditional use permit for a boat club
Page
, 10
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANiVING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,March 21,2011
6:30 o'clock p.m.
in the city,which was taken into account when they did their analysis. If the Planning Commission
approves another boat club,they would be impacting their livelihood at the marina.
Feuss commented he also knew that the City's regulations allowed for boat clubs.
Anderson asked if the City is going to require 25 off-site parking spots for this boat club.
Feuss stated the Planning Commission looks at each situation on their own merits.
Anderson commented the Planning Commission can justify it however they want,but that if Kujawa is
allowed to have 25 offsite parking stalls on a residential property,will he be allowed to take his vacant
boat slips and turn them into boat club slips without the need for additional parking. Anderson stated the
parking requirements are set up based on the number of boat slips and that he has reduced the number of
slips by 20 slips so he would be in compliance.
Feuss noted they are not addressing that issue tonight.
Anderson stated they are addressing whether they should grant a conditional use permit for a boat club.
Currently Sailors World is the only marina that is allowed to have a boat club and they are required to
have 25 offsite parking sites. Anderson stated that was one of the main factors they considered when they
were contemplating purchasing the property.
Thiesse asked if those 25 spots are just for boat club members.
Gaffron stated the history of that application is that in 1995, Sailors World requested a boat club CUP.
Approval was granted for a maximum of 100 boat club members from May through September subject to
annual confirmation and the 25 offsite parking locations. The City reserved the right to review the
conditional use permit if parking became a problem.
Gaffron noted the question of how the 25 parking stalls was arrived at came up at the last meeting. The
City Council first said 100 member maximum,which was based on a 7:1 members per boat ratio with an
anticipated 14 boats being available for use. That site had 79 boat slips at the time. The City Council
looked at 75 slips being available for slip rental or boat club use. The 75 boat slips times a ratio of 6
required 45 stalls and the site had 41 stalls,which resulted in a shortage. At peak activity they expected
all 14 boats to be in use at once,which would require an additiona121 stalls at a .5 ratio. If you use a .6
ratio times 14 club boats,that would require 61 rental slips. If that number is multiplied by .6,it results in
37 stalls. Twenty-one plus 37 results in 58. At peak activity,the marina only had 41 parking stalls,
which resulted in them being 17 short. Another issue that was taken into consideration at that time is the
applicant noted on peak days he would also park 10 to 12 cars at the gas station property and another 10
to 12 cars at the art center,which resulted in the 25 off-site parking stalls being required.
Feuss noted it was not just the boat club use that necessitated the need for the additional off-site parking
but also the marina use.
Gaffron stated it was the boat club's application requesting the addition of another use or activity at this
site that caused the City to require the offsite parking. Gaffron noted that not all of the Council members
agreed that the offsite parking was a good idea but it was still approved with that condition. The question
for the Planning Commission to consider is whether offsite parking to accommodate a new use at a
marina that is currently at its limit for parlcing should require some additional offsite parking. Currently
Page
11 .
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANI�TING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,March 21,2011
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Sailors World has that in place but the other four marinas do not. Gaffron noted there is no other
commercial property anywhere close by that could provide parking for the marina.
Feuss asked if at the last meeting they were told that the 25 spaces were no longer under contract.
Gaffron stated they were told that they have not had a contract with the art center or the gas station for at
least the last ten years. Since parking has not been an issue,it did not come up during the annual '
licensing application. �
Anderson noted they had 15 boat club members last year, so it was not an issue last year.
Gaffron stated they have been told that the number of boat club members usually does not exceed 50.
Thiesse noted the parking was based on a 1.5 ratio per boat for the boat club.
Gaffron stated the number 1.5 for boat club members was used by the applicant to calculate the parking
and that offsite parking was added to meet the City's parlcing requirements.
Feuss noted that was not the City's number. Feuss recommended the application be tabled until proof of
the offsite parking can be submitted.
Thiesse asked if there is any way this application can be approved subject to the parking. ,
Feuss stated a potential motion could be made to deny the application but recommend that further
documentation on the parking be submitted to Staff,and if Staff is satisfied that Section 78.668 can be
met based on the evidence,that Staff can then recommend to the City Council that it be approved. Under
the current regulations in effect,the application is out of compliance and there needs to be proof that they
are in compliance with Section 78-668.
Gaffron indicated the Code does not have a numerical parking standard at the present time.
Feuss noted the Code does require adequate parking for boat clubs. Feuss stated there is no way the
parking can be adequate if the current standards are not met on the marina.
Thiesse asked what type of parking they are requiring for the boat club under the conditional use permit.
Feuss stated the conditional use permit currently states adequate parking, and that under Section 78-668
defines those parking requirements. Until the applicant can demonstrate adequate parking, a conditional
use pernut should not be issued. The other issue that will be discussed later by the Planning Commission
is whether a boat club requires a different standard.
Thiesse asked whether Staff needs additional direction from the Planning Corrimission other than the
language adequate parking.
Gaffron stated the Planning Commission should determine what is adequate and whether the applicant
meets that since the Code currently does not contain a numerical parking standard. Gaffron indicated the
Planning Commission could accept.6 for this boat club if it so chooses.
Feuss noted that issue will be discussed under Item 3.
Page
12
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,March 21,2011
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Leskinen pointed out the Planning Commission can set whatever standard it sees�ts under the
conditional use pernut.
Feuss noted the City has granted a conditional use permit for boat clubs without defining adequate.
Curtis stated that the Planning Commission could make a determination that the marina standard is
adequate.
Feuss stated she would be willing to allow Staff to make the determination that parking is adequate based
upon the information submitted by the applicant.
Gaffron stated the applicant would need to show proof that he has adequate parking,which would be the
74.4 stalls, and then the recommendation would be to approve the conditional use permit.
Thiesse asked if that is based on a.6 ratio.
Gaffron indicated that is based on the .6 number.
Thiesse noted they have a gentleman here tonight who has a .5 ratio.
Feuss stated that was not the Planning Commission's requirement but rather the applicant's
recommendation.
Anderson stated the City Council required it on the conditional use permit.
Feuss suggested the City revisit that at some point in the future.
Gaffron noted it would be revisited if there were any issues or the marina could request it be revisited if
they feel it is unreasonable.
Leskinen commented the nature of a conditional use permit is loolcing at each application on its own
merit.
Thiesse stated in his opinion the parking standards should be consistent for all marinas and boat clubs.
Thiesse noted they are going to vote for a conditional use permit for a boat club that has no proof of
offsite parking and then they are going to discuss whether there should even be a conditional use pernut
for this type of application under Item 3.
Gaffron stated the applicant made an application under the existing code and that the City cannot force
the new code on him since his attorney may argue that he is only subject to the requirements that were in
place at the time the application was made. As part of the conditional use process,the Planning
Commission can put into place whatever standard they feel is appropriate for a boat club use.The
Planning Commission has the ability to make a finding that they believe it requires a ratio of.8,or.1,or .
.5,which would establish some numerical limit as to how many boats they can have. Whether that is
adopted as a standard for the new code or not,this applicant would still be subject to whatever the
Planning Commission requires with his conditional use permit.
Page
13
• MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,March 21,2011
r
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Schwingler stated in theory the Planning Commission could require 1.5 parking stalls on this application.
Schwingler noted Sailors World has not contracted for those 25 offsite parlcing sites for the last 10 years
and it has not come up as an issue. Schwingler commented they could require a 1.5 parking requirement.
Feuss asked why they would want to do that since they do not require that standard of anybody at the
current time.
Schwingler indicated he was speaking theoretically and that they could establish whatever parking ratio
they felt was adequate. �
Anderson commented it has to be a level playing field and that he is the only marina who can provide 25
offsite parking stalls. Anderson indicated he is agreement that it should be the same standard for all
marinas. Anderson stated there should be no double standards for parking requirements,no double
standards for green areas, or anything else.
Feuss moved,Schwingler seconded,to recommend denial�of Application#11-3501,Luke Kujawa on
behalf of MG Kaminski, 1444 Shoreline Drive, and recommend that the applicant submit further
evidence to Staff to demonstrate that the combined use of the marina and boat club will comply
with Section 78-668,which are the current regulations that are in effect and were in effect at the
time the applicant made his application for the conditional use, and if Staff is satisfied that the
objective requirements are met and adequate parking is available for the site,the conditional use
can be granted based upon approval by the City Council. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 1,Thiesse opposed.
3. #11-3500 CITY OF ORONO,ZOl�TING CODE AMENDMENT,REGULATION OF
BOAT CLUBS,7:48 P.M.-8:28 P.M.
Gaffron stated at the February Planning Commission meeting, a number of questions and concerns were
raised that resulted in tabling of the proposed amendment. The Planning Commission noted that the term
"boat club" is not clearly defined in the Code,but needs to be carefully defined given the variety of
boating options available today. Commissioners questioned the need for parking standards for the boat
club use and requested Staff to more clearly define the problem,to identify the objective the City would
like to achieve, and to outline the options for achieving that objective. In addition,the Planning
Commission suggested that other allowable uses within the B-2 District should be considered in terms of
their impacts on parking.
While the Zoning Code does not specifically define"boat club,"the entry within the Conditional Use
section of the B-2 standards does specify that this term refers to "time share" situations. As noted in last
month's discussion,during the Planning Commission's 1994 review of the B-2 Code,the concept of boat
club was informally defined as a situation in which there are multiple persons sharing in the use of a
single boat. �
It has been suggested that a boat club structured on a person purchasing the right to share in the use of a
variety of different boats owned by a single entity is nothing more than a formalized method of boat
rental,which is an allowed accessory use in the B-2 District. `The zoning code does not define boat rental.
To differentiate between a boat club and boat rental, Staff would suggest that in its most classic form,
boat rental might be considered as a one-time transaction between a boat owner and a boat user for a
Page �
14
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,March 21,2011
6:30 o'clock p.m.
single-day or short-term use,whereas a boat club suggests a longer-term relationship between the owner
and user, for multiple uses on multiple occasions.
Shared ownership and use of a single boat among multiple entities eliminates the transaction between the
boat owner and the boat user and therefore clearly does not fit the concept of a rental situation. The
zoning code does not specifically address or attempt to regulate fractional ownership situations,yet they
may have some of the same potential impacts as the first method of ownership.
The definition of boat club in Webster's dictionary is as follows: "A boat club is a sports club based
around boats,especially rowing and yachting,but also canoeing,motor boats and other small boats." A
boat club is an avenue for boaters who enjoy the boating lifestyle but might not have the time, skills,or
dollars to get out on the water. Traditional boat clubs have been around for a century;however,the
shared asset model concept has only been around a short time.
The shared asset model is based upon the recent surge in fractional ownership. Consumers are looking to
have all the benefits of owning luxury items from jets to handbags,without absorbing the brunt of the
costs. The By joining a boat�club,members do not have to worry about the costs associated with owning
a boat and simply make a reservation, get their boat, and go. The only other costs that the consumer pays,
after a membership fee and monthly dues,is the gas they use. Boaters are not limited to what type or size
of the boat they use. They get unlimited use of a fleet of boats. Membership plans vary by fleet,location,
and types of boating.
As it relates to the City's regulatory objective, during the 1970s and'80s,the City expended a great
amount of effort attempting to limit to curtail the impacts that marinas have on the use of Lake
Minnetonka as well as on the land. Those efforts resulted in a number of marinas reconfiguring their in-
water slips to meet City and LMCD standards. During the 1980s and'90s,the number of marinas in
Orono declined by two. During this time,three of the remaining five marinas underwent complete
renovation or replacement of their land-based facilities.
During the past 15 years, Orono's focus has shifted to ensuring that the commercial activity at its marinas
does not spill over into the surrounding residential neighborhoods or roadways, and that the activity
within the marina properties does not have negative impacts on the surrounding neighborhoods. Annual
marina licenses issued in 1993 and later have been conditioned on the marina meeting certain operational
standards. The standards were established in the City's marina licensing ordinance in 1993,two years
prior to the B-3 District code revisions that made boat clubs a conditional use. Boat clubs were not
addressed in the B-2 District prior to 1995. When boat clubs became a conditional use,rather than
establishing a separate numerical standard for boat club parking requirements,the City chose to rely on
the operational standard for parking but gave the Council wide discretion by including as the only
performance standard.
Staff feels that the City's regulatory objective with boat clubs today is most clearly stated by operational
standard number one,which reads as follows: "Parking facilities on the site shall be managed so as to
eliminate traffic or parking congestion, eliminate illegal on-street parking, and avoid pedestrian traffic
through neighboring property.
The basis for raising this issue in 2011 is simply that boat clubs appear to be on the rise. There is no
documentation that the one boat club operated in Orono since 1995 or earlier has caused any issues
related to parking.
Page
15
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,March 21,2011 .
6:30 o'clock p.m. �
The Planning Commission should consider the following options:
1. Recommend no changes, continue the current status of boat clubs as a conditional use, and
establish appropriate conditions for a given site at the time a CUP is requested. Whatever
conditions are established that would allow the City to limit or curtail the use in the future
must articulate a rational basis for such curtailment.
2. Revise Boat Club Conditional Use Standards. In this option,the Planning Commission could
recommend that a numerical standard be established for parking relative to the number of boat
� club boats being operated. Adding a numerical standard creates an administrative tool that
would automatically limit the allowed use to a certain level. The counter argument is that a
numerical standard may be viewed by those being regulated as arbitrary and anti-business.
3. Interim Use Pernut. The Interim Use Permit is a tool that might be very appropriate for the
boat club use. An I[TP does not grant permanent rights that stay with the property; it can
contain sunset provisions that make the use disappear if certain triggers are met. It can be
subject to regular review. The IUP is especially applicable in situations where the City is
concerned about the impacts of a use and doesn't want to make a permanent commitment to
allow the use. It is generally more acceptable for uses that do not require investments in
infrastructure such as buildings,roads,etc.
The Planning Commission could recommend that the zoning code be amended by(a) adopting
provisions to allow Interim Use Permits and then(b)removing boat clubs from the list of B-2
conditional uses and adding them to a new list of interim uses allowed in the B-2 District.
Then any request for a boat club CUP would be granted as an Interim Use Permit,perhaps
requiring a review or renewal ever 2-3 years to determine whether or not the use should be
allowed to continue. The basis for doing so would be that the boat club use may be appropriate
under a given level of operation but if it becomes problematic,conditions would be in place to
curtail or eliminate the boat club use.
. 4. Make boat clubs an accessory use. If the Planning Commission feels that regulation of boat
clubs as a conditional use permit is not appropriate because issuance of a CUP grants a
permanent right to that use, an option might be to change their status to an allowed
accessory use. In this case,the City would rely on the annual marina licensing reviews to
address and resolve any issues that arise related to the boat club use.
. As an option, a standard might be added to the accessory use listing that limits the level of
the boat club use to a certain percentage of the marina's on-water slips. Any expansion
beyond 25 percent would require a variance or might have a corollary conditional use entry.
Gaffron stated reliance on a set of regulatory criteria that does not contain clear standards by which
compliance can be easily measured will be dif�cult to enforce if the need arises. For that reason, Staff is
recommending that a numerical parlcing standard be established for the boat club use. While the marina
owners/operators would prefer to not be bound by a standard that will potentially limit their use,the City
needs to have some level of confidence in its ability to enforce its laws.
Orono has licensed marinas since the 1960s. It has been suggested that annual review of a boat club
Page
� 16
MINUTES OF THE
, ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,March 21,2011
6:30 o'clock p.m.
operation could be tied to the annual marina license review process. However, Staff is currently
attempting to streamline the marina licensing process we have attempted to follow in the past. Issuance
of annual marina licenses has often been delayed due to the perceived need to verify compliance with
operational standards via a site inspection. Staff would prefer to separate the issuance of licenses from
enforcement of specific zoning standards,which runs counter to the idea of an annual review of a boat
club as part of the licensing process. '
Given the options noted above, Staff would recommend the interim use permit option be pursued,with a
numerical standard for boat club parking,provisions for a review or renewal process at stated time
intervals and the ability to curtail the use if it becomes a problem. We aclrnowledge the marina operators'
wishes to not be highly regulated. We understand the Planning Commission's hesitation to recommend
fixing a potential problem that does not yet exist. Staff is looking at the topic proactively and believes it
would be in the City's best interest to have measurable and defensible standards to fall back on should
boat clubs become an issue due to parking problems.
Acting Chair Lesldnen opened the public hearing at 8:06 p.m.
Luke Kujawa, 1444 Shoreline Drive, stated the biggest challenge is defining what a boat club is. There
are family trusts that own boats,people that have informal agreements,which should be considered
fractional ownership, and boat clubs that own boats and rent them out to its members. Your Boat Club,
LLC, is set up as a rental organization but it does not rent boats to anyone from the general public who
might want to rent a boat on any given day but only rents to its members.
Kujawa stated nowhere in the country has there been a need to do something different for boat clubs since
they fall within those two definitions outlined in Staffs report. The City already has those two guidelines.
Kujawa stated in the past the boat club got pulled out from those two definitions and required a
conditional use permit,which does not make any sense since there are all different kinds of people that
rent boats. The fundamental issue is trying to define boat clubs. The way the code is written right now,
the City needs to come up with a definition since there are many different types of boat ownership.
Kujawa commented he understands Staff has a concern about parking and how that can be controlled.
The marina already has regulations it needs to comply with and he is not sure why we need more laws on
top of those. Having boat clubs separated out does not make sense and muddies the water.
Kuja,wa stated he also understands the interim use permit,but the City already has boat rental as an
accessory use and it is akeady allowed. The one thing that would completely simplify this�is to make
boat clubs an accessory use rather than a conditional use permit. The City has annual license renewals at
which time those issues could be addressed.
Kujawa pointed out that when it comes time to put a number to the parking,you could have a boat club
that owns 10 or 15 fishing boats or you could have a boat club that has twenty 40-foot cruisers,which
would have a significant impact on the parking.
Acting Chair Leskinen closed the public hearing at 8:12 pm.
Feuss stated at the last meeting the Planning Commission reviewed this and there was no evidence since
1994 that parking was a fundamental problem. Feuss stated she is opposed to imposing additional
regulation if it is not necessary, especially when there is no evidence to demonstrate a problem.
Page �
17
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,March 21,2011
6:30 o'clock p.m.
The City has evidence that the additiona125 slips that were required of Sailor's World have not been
under contract for the last ten years. Feuss commented she has a hard time believing that the City needs
to enact additional regulations to address this. Feuss stated she understand Staff is attempting to be
proactive,but that she feels there are already parking standards for the B-2 District.
As it relates to the Interim Use Permits,Feuss indicates she has a concern since it is something at some
point that will go,away and that she is reluctant to create a new set of zoning regulations for a problem
that is not identified and have this be a guinea pig for Interim Use Permits. If there is a problem,the
solution would be to look at the current regulations that are in existence. The City has a number of
accessory uses. All of those uses require parking above and beyond normal slip usage and the City
regulates them by the annual permit review. Feuss stated she would recommend it be made an accessory
use rather than an interim use or conditional use pernut since the CUP would go with the property. Feuss
stated her first choice would be to leave it as it and her second choice would be to make it an accessory
use. '
Thiesse asked if Commissioner Feuss's first preference would be to leave it as a conditional use.
Feuss indicated that in terms of what has been before the Planning Commission,there has been nothing
that demonstrated a problem and she has a fundamental problem with creating new regulations to address
this. Feuss stated her understanding of a boat club was that it was underutilized,which may have
changed over the years,but that the City does not have any evidence of that.
Feuss stated another issue is if you are going to add additional regulations to a boat club,then boat club
needs to be defined. Feuss indicated she does not consider it fractional ownership since the boat club is
engaged in a contract with the member to be able to rent it on numerous occasions as opposed to the
person who rents it periodically. Defining boat club versus rental,if additional conditions are to be added
to the conditional use,will be a challenge. Feuss indicated her initial reaction is to keep it the way it is
since the City has not identified a problem. '
Alexander indicated she would be in favor of making it an accessory use since the conditional use permit
is permanent.
Leskinen stated she would be comfortable with interim use or accessory use depending on how it is �
worded. Leskinen stated she does not see it as a time share since that implies ownership of some type.
The person owns nothing by being a member of a boat club but they are purchasing the privilege to use a
boat. Leskinen stated she sees it more as an accessory use to a marina and that she is slightly
uncomfortable with granting a conditional use permit since it is permanent.
Thiesse indicated he is in agreement with Commissioner Leskinen.
Leslcinen asked what risks the City would run into if it were to become an accessory use versus a
conditional use in terms of problems that might arise. Currently the Planning Commission is focused on
the parking issue but there may be other issues out there that have not been considered.
Feuss pointed out it would apply to a number of different uses.
Thiesse stated it would help to make it a level playing field if it were an accessory use.
Page
18
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,March 21,2011
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Gaffron stated the property owner would not have to come in for any additional approval to operate that
accessory use but would have to comply with whatever regulations are currently in place. The City has a
licensing process at the present time. If the City would like to regulate accessory uses through the
licensing process,it should be considered whether or not that is made a condition of the accessory use.
Curtis noted it is covered under the zoning code as well. Each marina use is expected to comply with the
zoning code.
Gaffron stated there is a list of 12 or 15 conditions that any conditional use would need to comply with.
Leskinen asked if an accessory use would adequately address any regulatory issues the City might have.
Gaffron indicated it would depend on how the individual use is written into the code.
Feuss noted that a marina could have 100 slips dedicated to rental use at the present time.
Leskinen commented the accessory use could be written to say that rentals cannot exceed 25 percent of
the total usage.
Gaffron stated the use that would be allowed could be limited to a certain percentage without asking for
approval by the City Council.
Leskinen stated with the interim use permits,it would give the City some flexibility in addressing
individual problems. Leskinen stated an interim use permit can be subject to periodic review, and asked �
if there were a trigger that would terminate the interim use permit,whether that would be reviewed or
whether it would automatically terminate the IUP without a review. .
Gaffron stated it would likely trigger a review. Under a conditional use permit, once that use is no longer
in existence,the permit would still stay with the property.
Curtis stated the Planning Commission under an interim use permit could attach the condition that if the
property changes hand,it would need to be reviewed since it would not be tied to the land.
Thiesse asked if the interim use permit could be transferred to a different property owner.
Gaffron indicated it could not and would be tied to the property that it is issued for.
Feuss stated unless the interim use permit identifies with certainty what would cause it to cease,it could
' become permanent.
Curtis stated if the zoning on the property is changed,it would cause the interim use permit to expire.
Feuss pointed out that at the time the interim use permit is established,it would be impossible to list all
the possibilities that would terminate the interim use permit. Feuss stated she does not feel it makes sense
to use this issue as a guinea pig since the City does not have any prior experience with interim use
permits.
Page
19
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,March 21,2011
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Leskinen stated she personally would lean more towards accessory use since it seems to be a better
alternative than an IUP or conditional use permit.
Feuss asked if it would be appropriate to have Staff compile a list of conditions and definitions for an
accessory use. .
Leskinen stated as an accessory use, Staff would be able to work in adequate parking requirements.
Leskinen asked whether a numerical number can be specified for an accessory use.
Thiesse commented the problem is the down time between the two shifts that a boat club typically has.
Schwingler commented parking has not been an issue in the past and that the amount of usage of marinas
has also fluctuated over time.
Gaffron stated Staff has gotten sufficient direction from the Planning Commission to pursue accessory
use and the conditions they would recommend be attached to that use. Gaffron indicated he will discuss
the matter further with the City Attorney to get his input.
Feuss stated she would like some percentage of the marina's use be limited to the accessory use.
Feuss moved,Leskinen seconded,to table Application#11-3500,City of Orono,Zoning Code
Amendment,Regulation of Boat Clubs,with direction to Staff to pursue boat clubs as an accessory .
use and to compile a list of recommendations for conditions that should be attached to the accessory
use. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0
PLANNING COMIVIISSION COMMENTS
5. REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES ATTENDING CITY
COUNCIL MEETINGS ON FEBRUARY 28,2011,AND MARCH 14,2011
Curtis reported that the City Council was given an update on the Old Crystal Bay Road project at the
February 28`�'meeting. David Rahn was appointed to the vacant position on the Council. There were no
planning items on the agenda.
At the March 14`�'meeting,there was another update on the Old Crystal Bay Road project and the Council
discussed appointees to the Planning Commission. Amelia Kroeger addressed the City Council regarding
an environmental display she is creating and requested approval to display it at City Hall. Stonebay
received an extension of their final plat and the Council formally accepted the Stonebay public
improvements. In addition,the City Council discussed wetland buffer signage,massage therapy licensure
and background checks for massage therapists.
6. OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION
Curtis noted the first open house for the hardcover regulations will be held on May 4t�'.
�
Page
20
NIINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMIVIISSION MEETING
Monday,March 21,2011
6:30 o'clock p.m.
7. SELECTION OF REPRSENTATIVES TO ATTEND CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ON
MARCH 28,2011,AND APRII, 11,2011
March 28, 2011 -Feuss
April 11,2011 -Schwingler
ADJOURNMENT
Feuss moved,Leskinen seconded,to adjourn the Orono Planning Commission meeting at 8:42 p.m.
VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
�/
Denise Leskinen,Acting Chair
� �
� Page
21