Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/16/2011 Planning Commission Minutes MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNTNG COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 16,2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. ROLL CALL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Chair Loren Schoenzeit,Commissioners Denise Leskinen,John Thiesse,Hue Alexander,Jon Schwingler, and Elizabeth Levang. Representing Staff were Assistant City Administrator for Long-Term Strategic Planning Mike Gaffron,Planning Coordinator Melanie Curtis, and Recorder Jackie Young. City Council Member David Rahn was present. Chair Loren Schoenzeit called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. CONSENT AGENDA Schwingler moved,Leskinen seconded,to approve the Consent Agenda as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. • , *1. APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OF MARCH 21, 2011 � Schwingler moved,Leskinen seconded,to approve the minutes of the Orono Planning Commission meeting of March 21,2011, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. NEW BUSINESS 2. 11-3503 CITY OF ORONO,ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT RESIDENTIAL ZOI�TING DISTRICTS: RESIDENTIAL DOCK RENTAL,6:32 P.M.—6:37 P.M. Curtis stated in order to preserve the residential character of neighborhoods and prevent competition with licensed marina businesses;rental of boat slips on residential docks has been limited in the City of Orono since 1962. Rental of boat slips on residential properties has been prohibited entirely since 1995. The City Code sections when taken together comprise the City's rules for rental of residential boat slips or docks are many and are scattered throughout the zoning code. These code sections are outlined within a City handout. This informational handout with the lengthy title"Orono Municipal Code Excerpts Regarding Prohibition of Boat Slip Rental in Residential Zones"is also lengthy in content. Staff is proposing a zoning code text amendment which will not change the rule but rather state the current rules more clearly and succinctly within a single code section. The Planning Staff recommends approval of the proposed draft ordinance clarifying the City's regulations regarding rental of boat slips on residential property. The draft ordinance should be moved forward to the City Council's May 23rd agenda for review. Chair Schoenzeit opened the public hearing at 6:33 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this item. Chair Schoenzeit closed the public hearing at 6:33 p.m. Page 1 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANrTING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 16,2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. Schwingler commented he likes the idea of making the ordinance clearer and more succinct. Schwingler asked if there was much discussion in 1995 regarding zero tolerance for renting out residential dock slips. Gaffron stated it had been an item that had been discussed before that as something the City should look at revising in the future.The issue at that time was that there had been marina owners that were unhappy with the fact that people could rent slips from residential properties. At the time the City was in the process of redoing the marina licensing for the B2 district and residential boat slips was not a huge issue. The marina owners were supportive of the idea that there would be fewer rentals of private slips. � Through the years there have been a number of neighborhoods that have been worse than others in terms of renting out slips and the City would receive periodic phone calls complaining of different issues. This test amendment,however,has been fairly well supported through the years. Schoenzeit asked if there is a limit on the number of boat slips for a residential property. Curtis indicated it is based on what the LMCD allows for each property based on their shoreline. Schoenzeit asked if the limit typically has been five boat slips. Gaffron stated it typically has been no more than four,and if there are more than two boat slips on a residential property,the LMCD verifies typically once a year that all of the boats are registered to the property owner. Through the years the language has been changed slightly. Levang stated the text amendment seems pretty straight forward and that she does not have any issue with the intent or the language of the ordinance. Levang moved,Alexander seconded,to recommend approval of Application#11-3503,City of Orono,Zoning Text Amendment Residential Zoning Districts: Residential Dock Rental,an Ordinance Amending Chapter 78 Regarding Private Docks in Districts LR-lA,LR-1B,LR-1C, and LR-1C-1. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. 3. 11-3504 CITY OF ORONO,ZOI�TING TEXT AMENDMENT RESIDENTIAL ZOIVING DISTRICTS: GARDENS AS A PERMITTED USE,6:37 P.M.-8:09 P.M. Curtis stated gardening and other horticultural uses are currently allowed in Orono as accessory uses • within residential zoning districts. A permitted principal use must be present on the property prior to the accessory use being allowed. This means a house must exist on the property before a dock,a shed,or even a garden may be allowed. Crop farms are currently allowed and require a minimum of ten acres of land. Orono's Zoning Code defines crop farms as "a parcel of land comprising an area of ten or more acres that are used for the growing of plants,trees,or shrubs with or without profit." In the rural residential districts, crop farms are allowed as a permitted or principal use; and within the lakeshore residential districts, crop farms are allowed as a conditional use. The City was recently approached by individuals interested in creating a community garden in Orono. The community garden would be run by volunteers. They propose to utilize vacant property to plant and maintain a garden for the purpose of donating the harvest to a local food bank and/or charity. , Page 2 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLAN1vING COMINIISSION MEETING Monday,May 16,2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. In April,the City Council directed Staff to study zoning code text amendments regarding community gardens. It made sense to include private,residential gardens in the study of community gardens. Within the residential zoning districts,text amendments would be necessary in order to classify private gardens as a principal,pernutted use. This may allow the owner of a vacant residential property to create a garden plot for their personal use absent a principal structure. Private gardens on vacant properties,if properly maintained,may have little to no negative impact on the immediate neighborhood. However,a garden requires regular maintenance,monitoring and upkeep. Orono has property maintenance regulations that would also apply to garden properties so they do not become a nuisance. As previously mentioned, a shed is not permitted on a property where a principal residence is not present. It may be appropriate to allow a minimal garden shed on the property in conjunction with a private garden to allow for adequate storage of hoses, shovels,wheelbarrows, and other necessary gardening equipment to keep the property tidy. Fencing should also be considered as many gardens require a sturdy fence to keep out animals such as rabbits and deer. Multi-tenant community gardens are typically found in higher density, smaller lot,urban-sized neighborhoods. Some cities or neighborhoods have a specific property designated and available for use as a community garden. A distinction should be made between a single-user community garden such as a charity or nonprofit group growing food to donate and a multi-user garden where individual plots are divided off for individual use. There are benefits and unique challenges with both types. The City can control how the garden is used and maintained via the use of a pernut. A pernut fee may be imposed to cover costs if the community garden is on a city-owned property. As community gardens typically exist within residential areas,the issue of farm stands or other related commercial uses should be discussed. The majority of Orono is made up of 2-acre zoning districts with many of the lots greater than two acres • in area. Orono strives to maintain its rural character,and`while they have rural feel, community gardens distributed throughout the City on private properties may not be consistent with our goals as a city. Nor does Staff have a clear understanding of the level of need for this type of use in Orono. Options the Planning Commission may want to consider include: minimum standards for private gardens as a principal use within all residential zones and add community gardens as a principal, conditional or even interim use in residential zones; add community gardens to be an accessory to an institutional use allowed by CUP such as schools,churches,etc.,designate a specific city-owned property or properties for use as a community garden for a single user. The City could issue a permit and impose conditions as well. as a fee to cover staff time and the water usage bill for the season. The city-owned vacant lot behind the Long Lake/Orono Fire Station on Willow is one example of a potential site which was explored by the interested parties for a community garden. There are specific challenges associated with allowing any type of community garden on either public or private property. The challenges could become long-term problems if the property owner is unwilling or unable to be responsive to issues. There are a number of issues that do not fall under the Planning Commission's review,including,but not limited to,use of a city-owned property, determining the appropriate user of a city-owned property and access to water, etc. These are decisions the City Council must make from a policy standpoint. Staff included a table in the staff report identifying potential issues. The Planning Commission should discuss how those potential issues could be addressed relating to a community garden. Page 3 MINUTES OF THE �ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 16,2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. � The Planning Commission should also discuss and make recommendations regarding the following issues for discussion: � 1. Property size: Is a certain size property more appropriate for a community garden? 2. Zoning: a. Are certain zoning districts a better fit than others? b. Should a community garden be limited to residential districts? c. Is a garden use appropriate on a commercially zoned property? 3. Is a multi-user community garden an appropriate use for Orono? Is a single user/nonprofit community garden an appropriate use? 4. Would an interim use permit,which includes a sunset date,be an appropriate mechanism for allowing a community garden? 5. Garden sheds: a. Should a shed require a special pernut tied to the gardem use? b. What is an acceptable maximum size for a private garden shed? c. What if the garden is only used for a limited amount of time? Should the shed be removed? 6. What type(s) of fencing is appropriate for a private garden or a community garden? In order to address the desire for locally grown foods,encourage a healthier community and enhancement of green spaces, Staff finds ha while here are a few minor logistical challenges with private residential � gardens on vacant properties,it may be appropriate to amend the zoning code to allow private gardens as a permitted use in each residential district. Consideration should be given to the issues surrounding . fencing and garden sheds, etc. Staff finds that community gardens require a different approach altogether. There are many . considerations to take into account regarding a community garden. The Planning Commission should discuss each of the issues outlined within Staff s report and give general direction to Staff and Council. Ultimately the City Council must determine their interest in moving forward with allowing private gardens, community gardens,where community gardens are appropriate, and the use of city property for that purpose. • � ° The Planning Commission should review the sample definitions in Exhibit A and decide on the most appropriate definitions for"private garden" and"community garden." Staff recommends approval of a zoning code text amendment to allow private gardens as a permitted use on residentially zoned properties as well as the following standards: private gardens should be set back at least ten feet from all property lines; a garden shed should be permitted up to 50 square feet and must meet principal structure setbacks for the appropriate zone, and fencing may be permitted in conjunction with the standards in Zoning Code Section 78-1405. Page 4 MINUTES OF T� ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING , Monday,May 16,2011 ' 6:30 o'clock p.m. Staff further recommends approval of a zoning text amendment to allow single-user,nonprofit � community gardens within the City in accordance with the following: community gardens may be allowed on only city-owned property in conjunction with a permit and fee;the user should be a nonprofit group and proceeds should be donated to charity;principal structure setbacks should be required for all � garden uses;no permanent fencing should be pernutted;no commercial sale of produce or farm stands should be permitted;parking shall be in a designated area with a maximum of two vehicles or one school bus on the site at one time; one port-a-potty pernutted at principal structure setback;no permanent : structures should be allowed-raised beds, sheds,etc.; and a single sign no greater than 4'x 4'should be permitted to identify the site. Lesldnen asked if a community garden were located on city property,if the City would be at increased liability risk and whether the site must be ADA compliant. Curtis stated she spoke with Orono's building official today regarding the ADA compliance and he indicated he will need to do some additional research on that. Curtis stated there would need to be some way to address the liability issue and that the City Attorney would need to address that. Leslcinen asked if that is something the Planning Commission should address or whether they should leave that to the Council. � Curtis indicated in her vie,w it is a policy decision that should be addressed by the City Council. Alexander asked if it is necessary for the Planning Commission to think about the types of chemicals that would be allowed to be used and the effects on runoff on a city-owned property. Curtis stated that is something that could be put in place with the permit. Curtis pointed out that there are a number of issues that Staff has not raised tonight. The majority of the issues raised by Staff in the report are planning issues, such as land use impacts,but that governing the types of chemicals could be addressed in the pernut. Thiesse asked if this process could be accomplished in sufficient time or on an interim basis to allow for a garden this year. Thiesse commented that there are a number of issues that should be thoroughly reviewed and that in his view the process should not be rushed. ♦ . Curtis stated she would like the Planning Commission to go through the issues tonight, and if the Planning Commission feels it has sufficiently addre'ssed the issues outlined in the report,as well as any other issues that are raised tonight,then the application could be brought forward to the City Council. If the Planning Commission is not satisfied and would like additional information,the application can be tabled. Schoenzeit asked whether anyone has made a formal application to the City for a community garden. Curtis indicated no one has made a formal application or a formal request to the City at this point but that there is one group who has expressed interest in creating a community garden. Curtis noted there are some people in the audience tonight who would like to speak on this application. Levang noted she has interest in this application and that she is part of the group that would like to create a community garden in Orono. . Page 5 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COA�IlVIISSION MEETING Monday,May 16,2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. r Levang suggested the Planning Commission consider issuing a special event pernut to handle the community garden this year. Levang stated the community garden and the residential gardens are two separate issues and should be discussed separately. Schoenzeit commented he was surprised to see public and private gardens combined since they are different items. Schoenzeit opened the public hearing at 6:53 p.m. April Wysocki,2770 Rainy Road, stated Liz Levang,herself,and a couple other people met and discussed the possibility of creating a community garden. Dan Saufferer,a resident of Minnetonka, contacted their group and asked if they were interested in starting a community garden. Dan is currently overseeing a community garden located on the property of St.Therese Church in Deep Haven. Wysocki stated they have also called together a few experts in the field and had a meeting. There was a gentleman from Buffalo that also joined the meeting who indicated he owns a natural compost farm and has offered their group the compost for free. Wysocki indicated that gentleman has a new method of fertilizing plants in that he sprays them with oxygenized water. Wysocki stated the grass will need to be removed from the site at the Long Lake Fire Station prior to starting the garden and that some gentlemen have volunteered to help with that task. As it relates to the water usage,the Long Lake City Council has approved the installation of a spigot on the water main that runs along the fire station,which is adjacent to the property that is being considered for a community garden. The fire chief has indicated he does not want their cars utilizing the parking lot for the fire station. In addition,the fire chief has requested that the garden be located far enough off the property line to accommodate parking for their pancake breakfast. Wysocki indicated she has marked off an area that is 100'x 100'. They would also like to have a parking area for the garden volunteers. Wysocki indicated she measured her car up against a bus and that an area the size of a bus would allow for four cars. Schoenzeit asked if this is the same site where the Work Force housing application was for. Wysocki indicated it is. The group also has learned that the Miller property to the north and south is a residential property and he currently has a garden. The property adjacent to the freeway is still owned by the Millers. Wysocki indicated they have heard that Mrs.Miller may be willing to donate that property at some point in the future but at this point their group is just interested in the 100'x 100'piece of property. Thiesse asked if the access would be through the fire station property. Wysocki indicated it would be and that there is currently a road leading to the site. Curtis noted there is a road located on the south side of the fire station. Thiesse asked if the Millers are aware of this proposal. � Gaffron indicated there has not been a formal application submitted that would trigger the City contacting them. Page 6 � MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 16,2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. Dan Saufferer, 16820 Edgewood Avenue,Minnetonka,stated he approached Mayor McMillan about a community garden or a donation garden being started in Orono. Initially they were looking at a parcel located at the corner of Willow arid Wayzata Boulevard,which is owned by the bank,but was informed that they could not have a garden at that location unless it was ten acres or more. Saufferer indicated he then asked Staff if that rule could be changed. Saufferer indicated he is interested in finding out how they can put together a donation garden for the local food shelves on properiy located by the City of Orono. The water would be provided by the City of Long Lake. On a half acre garden, approximately six to seven thousand pounds of fresh produce would be produced each year. Saufferer commented that a garden of this type would be a very positive thing for the community. Saufferer stated as it relates to the roadway leading into the garden from the fire station,it is his understanding the City of Orono owns the south side boundary drive that goes behind the fire station and does not actually enter the fire station parking lot. There is ample space for multiple cars in that area but some minor improvements would be required to prevent cars from sinking into the mud. The garden at St.Therese is an 80'x 80'garden and last year it produced 3,400 pounds of fresh produce, which went to support the ICA Food Shelf in Hopkins and Minnetonka. Saufferer pointed out the area on the overhead that the fire chief requires for the helicopter to land and to accommodate parking for the pancake breakfast. There is a retaining pond located on the other side. This is the only site that can accommodate the garden. Saufferer pointed out Mrs.Miller's properties.At the present time the site is covered with high grass and would need to be mowed. The access to the garden and the parking area was pointed out. Saufferer indicated there would probably need to be some aggregate placed in the area for the parking as well as some leveling of the site. The water spigot would be located near the site and the water would be supplied from the City of Long Lake. Schoenzeit noted a 100'x 100'foot garden would be approximately a quarter of an acre rather than a half acre. Thiesse asked whether any portion of the garden would be located on the Miller property. Saufferer indicated it would not be on the Miller property and noted that the city-owned property consists of approximately three acres. Saufferer pointed out on the overhead the location of the garden. Schwingler asked what challenges he has encountered with the community garden at St.Therese. Saufferer stated the main issue has been deer eating some of the produce a few times last year but that for the most part they have not encountered many challenges. The city of Deep Haven has a restriction of a five foot fence and so they erected a three foot fence for bunnies and then erected strands of wire along the top of the five foot fence posts. Saufferer indicated he is not sure what Orono's ordinances are for fence height but that they are willing to comply with that. In addition, odor deterrents will prevent a deer from entering an area and that can be used along the perimeter. Saufferer indicated he has utilized laundry detergent in the past to keep the deer from entering the garden area. Schwingler asked whether they are envisioning a shed on this property or have one at St.Therese. Page 7 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 16,2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. Saufferer stated they are not envisioning the need for a shed at this location and that the tools can be hauled in an individual's car. It would be beneficial to have some sort of a mail box or a closed container where calendars can be kept detailing what needs to be done on which days and would allow people to come at different times. In this type of a situation,it would be advantageous to have a more coordinated time schedule and set up a group of people to tend to the garden probably three days a week throughout the season. Leslcinen asked whether there would be any signage. Saufferer indicated they do not have any signage at St.Therese other than a small volunteers are wanted sign. Schwingler asked whether he has any rain barrels at St. Therese. Saufferer stated they do not have any rain barrels but do have two spigots tapped into the well system of the church and two 100-foot hoses. It takes approximately an hour and a half to water an 80'x 80'garden. Leskinen asked if there would be any benches or chairs. Saufferer stated they stored some bags in buckets there to take the produce to the food shelf but that it may be necessary to find a more secure container due to the mice accessing the containers. The fencing at St.Therese is the regular T-metal stakes that are temporary with the fencing being wired on and removable. There is currently an RFP for St.Therese to develop that property into senior housing so the fencing was temporary in nature Chair Schoenzeit closed the public hearing at 7:09 p.m. Schoenzeit stated he would prefer the community garden have its own separate regulations and not necessarily apply to a private garden. Schoenzeit suggested the Planning Commission talk about a community garden on public land versus a community garden located on private property. Curtis concurred that the two issues should be discussed separately. The current code reads that a person is allowed to have a garden as long as there is a home on the lot and that a garden is not a permitted use without a home. Curtis suggested the Planning Commission first look at how to address changing the code and whether they agree with Staffs recommendations. Thiesse stated it appears they are talking about three different types of gardens: a private garden,a community garden, and a multi-tenant garden. Thiesse asked whether Staff is opposed to a multi-tenant ' garden. - Curtis stated in Staff's view they do not see the need in Orono for a multi-tenant garden but that they did not formally make a recommendation against it. Thiesse indicated he is in agreement with Staff and that perhaps multi-tenant gardens could be taken off the table in tonight's discussion. Schoenzeit commented that multi-tenant gardens could perhaps be discussed when the need or desire for one arises. . � Page 8 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMIVIISSION MEETING Monday,May 16,2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. � Levang stated in her view the multi-tenant and the single use would need to be approached separately. ' Schwingler indicated he has had experience with multi-tenant gardens and that over time tension developed between the users. Levang stated she would like to see them as two separate issues and that they should divide community garden into single user versus multi users. Thiesse stated he would prefer not to deal with multi-tenant tonight since there does not appear to be a need for them in Orono at this time. Levang stated the only people coming forward to talk about a community garden are the people in this room tonight and that there has not been much demand for it,which is why she suggested trying a special event pernut to see how it would work on a trial basis. This project would be a joint venture with Long Lake. Levang indicated the Long Lake mayor and fire chief are on board with the project and that their group is looking for a way to bridge the two communities. Levang stated in her view this would be a wonderful opportunity to bring the two communities together and that this is a trial to see if it will work. Schoenzeit stated the Planning Commission will need to look at having some type of permit since this will be on public land as well as establishing some guidelines,such as designating a principal contact, fencing requirements, a requirement to call Gopher One if there is any digging on the property, and access resh-ictions. Levang noted the special event permit does call out some of those items and it would also give you some flexibility and oversight by the City.�The special event permit would also mean that it will be a temporary use and the City will have some control over the project. Schoenzeit noted on Page 5 of the Staff inemo the Planning Commission was provided with a nice outline of issues to discuss and that perhaps the Planning Commission should start there. Leslcinen stated she would like to take a look at the overall ordinance rather than focusing on one particular aspect of it. Leskinen stated since there is no specific application in front of them,the Planning Commission should look at the entire text amendment and get the broad ideas and broad definitions out of the way before looking at one potential possibility for a community garden. Saufferer stated community gardens generally represent a place where you pay a certain number of dollars to rent a certain size plot. The garden they are proposing would have a group of individuals headed by a committee to deliver product to a particular food shelf. Saufferer indicated he would like to change the verbiage to a donation garden since it will not technically be a community garden but it will be nonprofit and the produce will be donated. A community garden usually means that people are renting plots and a donation garden means that the produce will be donated somewhere. Leskinen concurred that that distinction is good and could provide some clarity to the ordinance. Schoenzeit stated the first item for discussion listed in Staffs report is property size. Schoenzeit recommended they talk about a single contact donation garden. The questions are whether there needs to ' be some formal agreement between the land owner and the contact person and does the site need to meet any setbacks. Page 9 MINUTES OF THE _ ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 16,2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. Levang asked what Staffs reasoning is for a 10-foot setback. Curtis stated that relates to a garden located on a residential property and that she recommended a 10-foot setback because that is typically the City's minimum setback requirement for any type of structure,and absent a principal use,it was Staff's feeling there should be a setback. Thiesse pointed out that definition number three states that a garden is a planned space,usually outdoors, set aside for the display, cultivation, and enjoyment of plants and other forms of nature. Definition number two is a plot of ground,usually near a house,where flowers, shrubs,vegetables,fruits or herbs are cultivated. Thiesse stated in his opinion that would cover the row of arborvitae that runs along someone's property lines since they are cultivated shrubs. Thiesse noted those are typically planted within 10 feet of the property line and help define the edge of someone's property. Thiesse stated in his opinion to require them to be 10 feet away from a property line seems a little strong and that he is not sure how to get around the fact that a land owner should be allowed to plant flowers at the edge of tl�eir property. � Schoenzeit noted that fences are also erected within ten feet of the property line typically. ' Gaffron noted they are now discussing a community or donation garden. Curtis stated a setback requirement was put in Staff's report basically as a starting point and that the Planning Commission may determine a setback for a private garden is not necessary Schoenzeit commented there are probably a number of private gardens that would not comply with a 10-foot setback. Gaffron stated the Planning Commission has to separate the concept of a private residence garden versus a vacant lot in a developed neighborhood that is then used as a community garden and the impacts it would have on the surrounding homes. Schoenzeit stated in his view in that type of situation with a community/donation garden a setback would be useful. � Thiesse stated he would agree that a 10-foot setback would be useful. Curtis concurred that a 10-foot setback would be reasonable. Curtis noted that Staff was recommending a principal structure setback in that type of situation with a community/donation garden. Schoenzeit stated a 30 to 50 foot setback would be steep and that in his view 10 feet is a good number. Curtis noted the activity associated with the gardening is also a reason for the setback. Schoenzeit asked if there should be a minimize size property that the community/donation garden should be located on. Schoenzeit commented that a minimum of 10 acres in his opinion seems rather large. Thiesse stated if they meet the 10-foot setback,it would give you a reasonable sized garden. ' Curtis asked if the Planning Corrnnission would place a specific size limitation on the garden. Page 10 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING CONIlVIISSION MEETING Monday,May 16,2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. Schoenzeit stated he would not require a minimum size on the property or a maximum percentage of the acreage either. Schwingler asked for clarification on what Chair Schoenzeit is referring to. Schwingler noted currently the City has a minimum 10 acre requirement to have a garden without a stntcture. Schwingler asked if Chair Schoenzeit is saying that you do not need to have a minimum size lot in order to have a garden. Schoenzeit indicated as long as they meet the setback for that zone,there should not be a size requirement. Curtis asked whether he is referring to a 10-foot setback in general or a 10-foot setback for that particular zoning district. . . . Schoenzeit noted if there is a principal structure setback in that particular zone,whatever zone the garden is in,it would need to meet that setback. Schoenzeit stated if it is in a 2-acre zone,the garden would need to meet the 30-foot structural setback. Schoenzeit asked what zone the proposed garden is located in. Curtis indicated it is in the 2-acre RR-1 district,which would require a 50-foot front and rear setback and a 30-foot side setback. Schoenzeit asked if they would still be able to have a 100'x 100'plot in there if they met those setbacks. Curtis stated she would like to avoid discussing this particular donation garden but that there is probably enough area to accommodate a 100'x 100'garden. Curtis indicated she is not sure whether that would � accommodate the helicopter pad,the parking, and�he garden. • Schoenzeit commented that the Planning Commission does not want to make it so complicated that a survey would be required to plant a garden. . Levang commented there are also elements of the topography that would come into play on where a garden could be located. Levang suggested the Planning Commission consider a 10-foot setback and that they have to allow the person to pick the spot that is the most conducive to their garden. Schoenzeit noted the Planning Commission has an obligation to the neighbors to ensure that the activities associated with the garden are copacetic. Schoenzeit commented that a community/donation garden is a wonderful idea but that the Planning Commission has responsibility to the adjoining properties. Alexander stated a 10-foot setback from all property lines is reasonable. Curtis indicated she would like a show of hands or some kind of indication on how each commissioner stands on each of these issues so she will be�able to provide a clear understanding on each of these points to the City Council. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that a 10-foot setback from all property lines should be required. Page 11 1VIINUTES OF TI� ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 16,2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that there does not need to be a minimum lot size to have a community or donation garden provided it meets the 10-foot setbacks. Curtis noted they will also likely need to accommodate areas for parking and other things on the property. Schoenzeit stated as it relates to the location of the garden,the person should be able to pick the spot that he feels is most conducive. Schoenzeit stated the Planning Commission is focused on single contact donation gardens. � Schoenzeit stated as it relates to Item No.4,permitting,he would defer to legal counsel on what type of permit would be appropriate. Clearly the things that the Planning Commission would like to see are an agreement between the property owner and the community/donation garden person as well as a contact person, and then requirements for Gopher One calling if that is necessary. Curtis stated technically the permit could be a land alteration permit,which is an administrative permit so additional conditions cannot be placed on that type of pernut. Curtis commented that the concept of a special event permit being issued is an interesting concept but pointed out that a garden is a use rather than an event. A temporary use permit could be created, such as an NP. Special events typically are such things as a block party,carnival,circus,commercial movie shoot,fishing contest,hot air balloon event, etc. ' Thiesse commented he prefers the issuance of a pernut that would be reviewed every so often because the use of a garden might change over time or issues may arise. Schoenzeit asked whether the Planning Commission is interested in allowing a shed. Schoenzeit asked whether everyone is pernutted a small shed on their properiy currently. Curtis indicated you would need to have a principal use on a property in order to have a shed. A permit would be required for any structure to allow for the City to review hardcover and other issues on the property. Gaffron stated it would still require a zoning permit even though it is not triggered by the building code. Schoenzeit noted a shed would not be allowed then under the City's current codes. Thiesse commented that people are very capable of moving their equipment around in their own vehicles and that if the garden is located on public property, a shed or other structure would become a risk since it could be vandalized. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that no shed will be allowed for a community/donation garden on public property. Schoenzeit stated as it relates to Item No. 6,the fencing would need to meet current City code. Schoenzeit questioned whether they would be allowed a fence without a principal structure. Curtis indicated Staff was looking for direction on the type of fencing, and if it can be accomplished with temporary fencing,that would be Staff's recommendation. Page 12 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 16,2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. Saufferer commented wire fencing would be adequate for their purposes. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that the fencing be temporary in nature, such as chicken coop fencing, and not to allow fencing that is orange in color. ' Schoenzeit stated he would defer to the building official on any structures. Benches and tables would need to be temporary. Schoenzeit stated if someone wanted to bring in a table to wash the vegetables on, they could bring in a folding card table and then take it with them the same day. Levang indicated she would be okay with having a bench or a picnic table so a person would have a place to sit or accommodate people who want to watch. • Schoenzeit stated they would need to bring a chair or table and then take it with them when they leave. Levang commented there is a community garden in Plymouth located by the work house that has a nice little shelter with a roof and a table underneath.Levang stated she would not be opposed to having a picnic table placed there at the beginning of the season,which could then be taken down at the end of the season. Leskinen stated she would be opposed to that and that it is easy to bring your chair. Leskinen stated that anything that is left is an invitation for vandalism. Thiesse stated in this situation the garden is for the entire community and that he personally would be opposed to having a table left there all season. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission to not allow a table,chairs, or other items to be left at the garden for the entire season. Schoenzeit stated bike racks would also not be allowed. Schoenzeit asked whether a compost pile should be allowed. Saufferer indicated a compost site would not be located on the property for the donation garden. Saufferer noted the City does currently have a collection site that individuals can bring items to and that he would consider the City of Orono to be a resource for compost for the garden. Saufferer indicated he may ask the City to provide him with organic material, such as leaf matter, grass clippings, etc. Saufferer stated he would not have a problem with transporting the material over to the garden and having it tilled into the ground. The garden could be a resource for the City to get rid of some compost matter as well. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that a compost pile not be located on the site for the community/donation garden. Schoenzeit stated the concept is that anything generated on the site will be taken out that day. Schoenzeit asked whether there needs to be erosion control. Saufferer stated erosion control will be necessary for this site but that in his opinion it is manageable. Page 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 16,2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. Schoenzeit suggested the Planning Commission defer to the City to require any such items that are required due to the unique characteristics of the land in question. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that there will be no selling of fruits or vegetables at the site. . Schoenzeit asked what the hours of operation should be. Schoenzeit stated in his view there should be no need for lighting. _ Leskinen suggested dawn to dusk. Thiesse concurred there should be no additional lighting. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that no additional lighting be allowed. Schoenzeit asked what the Planning Commission feels is necessary for maintenance/tilling of the site. Leskinen stated it would need to be addressed on a specific basis. ' Curtis indicated that item related to Staff questioning what would happen at the end of the season. Schoenzeit stated that could be part of the permitting process. As it relates to noise, Schoenzeit noted gardening tends to be a fairly quiet operation. Thiesse asked if Staff has a concern with noise before a certain hour of the day. Curtis indicated that was the issue as well as noise that could be generated from various equipment that might be used at the site. Gaffron stated the hours on the weekends could be different, such as no activity before 8 a.m. Saufferer indicated he will not be rototilling before 8 am. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that all gardening activity needs to meet the City's noise ordinance. � Schoenzeit asked what limitations or conditions should be placed on parking. Schoenzeit asked whether there should be a minimum or a maximum number of off street parking spaces available. Curtis stated that Staff would concur that off street parking be required and recommended that a restriction be placed on the number of vehicles that can be at the site at one given time. Curtis suggested that a maximum of one bus or two cars be allowed. Curtis stated it was indicated to her by Mr. Saufferer that they hope at some point to have school visits to the site. Curtis stated the City does not want an improved parking area that will be large and that they should try to avoid a lot of traffic to the site. Alexander commented that two parking spots seem to be somewhat restrictive. Page 14 � MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMIVIISSION MEETING Monday,May 16,2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. Schoenzeit concurred that two parking spots is not very many given the proposed size of the garden and that any community garden should have two off street spots and perhaps more if permissible. ' Saufferer stated at St.'Therese last year the largest number of volunteers they had on one day was 19 and that there were multiple people in varying vehicles. The volunteers utilized the off street parking located next to the garden. The majority of the time they had four to five automobiles. Saufferer indicated the biggest challenge will be to find volunteers,but that it would be reasonable to expect between four to six cars at any one time. It will not be necessary to accommodate 25 cars. Levang asked how long people typically stay. Saufferer stated it will probably range from one to two hours for planting if they have ten people volunteering.When the harvesting is done,it would take approximately an hour. The volunteers would gather what they could and then transport it to the food shelf,which would then sort it,package it and make it available to people that same day. , Saufferer indicated they also had Summer Stretch lcids that came up from St.Hubert's every Wednesday through July. The lcids would serve two hours of community service in the morning and would harvest the food and learn about the garden. They were then driven down to ICA where they would help put the produce on the scales and weigh it and watch the process of how the food got from the front door to the clients. The kids were able to see how the food shelf operated and how the garden helped support the community. Saufferer indicated the kids seemed to have a positive experience. . Schoenzeit stated he would encourage a minimum of two spots and then defer to the Council to decide whether more spots should be allowed. Thiesse asked whether access to the site would need to be created or whether they would be allowed to park on the street. Schoenzeit noted parking for a specific site would need to be part of the pernutting process for that particular application and that all community/donation gardens would require some off street parking. Thiesse stated he would hate to require two spots if it results in someone having to construct a road access. ' Gaffron noted the group was talking earlier about potentially putting down some gravel to create a parking area,which in turn would create some hard surface area. Gaffron asked whether the City wants to encourage that type of parlcing area or whether the Planning Commission is comfortable with allowing people to park on the grass. ' Leskinen asked whether the language could read that there needs to be available parking either on site or off site. Leskinen commented she is not sure the City wants someone to create a parking lot or hardcover since that would change the site. If the garden ceases to be in existence after a period of time,then there would be the issue of the hardcover remaining. Thiesse recommended that parking be included in the permitting process Schoenzeit recommended there be a minimum of two parking spots for a community/donation garden. Page 15 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 16,2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. Thiesse stated the parking would likely be dependent on the size of the plot. Levang stated the lot next to the fire station is essentially being used as a parking lot and that it would likely be a maximum of two hours that a car would be sitting there. Levang indicated she is okay with the two parlcing spot requirement. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that parldng be site specific,with a minimum of two parking spots being identified for each garden. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission to not allow rain barrels or raised beds. Schoenzeit stated restrooms should also not be allowed. Levang asked if he is talking about a permanent structure or a port-a-potty. Schoenzeit indicated he is talking about both. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission to not allow a port-a-potty or a permanent restroom facility. � Schoenzeit asked whether signage should be allowed. • Alexander commented a 4'x 4'sign seems reasonable. Thiesse asked if the City is going to delineate what can be on the sign. Curtis noted the City cannot regulate the content of the sign but they are able to regulate the size and location. Curtis noted a sign is not permitted in a residential area. Thiesse stated signage is not required for a community/donation garden but it would be nice to allow them to showcase what they are doing. Schoenzeit stated the signage should be based on what the zoning district allows. � Levang stated she would like to see the garden identi�ed and that a 4'x 4'sign is not that big. Schoenzeit recommended the signage be deferred to the permitting process. Schoenzeit indicated he would be in agreement that a sign would be nice but if it is located in a neighborhood that does not allow signage, it would need to be taken into consideration. • Thiesse commented a small sign would be nice and that he would suggest that the sign contain some contact information in the event there is vandalism or other issues at the garden. . It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that the signage be discussed as part of the permitting process. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission to not allow permanent storage containers. Page 16 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 16,2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. Schoenzeit noted the traffic would need to be minimal and that it would need to be discussed as part of the permitting process. Curtis noted the traffic is tied to the parking. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission to allow temporary trellises, cages,poles, supports, etc., during the growing season. Curtis requested the Planning Commission provide direction on private gardens. Thiesse asked whether the Planning Commission.,could move the community/donation garden forward to the City Council at this point. . Schoenzeit stated in his view Staff has good direction on the community/donation garden. Schoenzeit asked whether there should be a 10-foot setback on a private garden. Thiesse stated he does not want to go ten feet on a private residential garden. Thiesse asked where a fence is legally allowed to be located. . Curtis noted a fence is a non encroachment and is allowed at the property line. Thiesse commented a lot of gardens define property lines. , Leskinen pointed out this is in the case where there is not a principal structure. Curtis stated this would deal with gardens that are located on vacant lots and that Staff would recommend some type of setback to serve as a buffer to the adjoining properties. Curtis stated it could perhaps be better defined in the definition and that a perennial garden could define a property line versus a vegetable garden. Schoenzeit stated a private,residential garden on a vacant lot would need to follow the same sort of discussion on the same points under the community/donation garden. Leskinen indicated she is comfortable with Staff's recommendations on the private garden. � Curtis suggested the Planning Commission discuss the various items and whether they feel there should be different regulations for a private,residential garden versus a community/donation garden. Schoenzeit stated in his view a 10-foot setback is reasonable. . Thiesse indicated he would not be opposed to a row of flowers or shrubs along the property line. Curtis stated the definitions can be modified. Thiesse noted the definition of a garden includes shrubs,which in his opinion should be allowed along the property line. Schoenzeit recommended crops require a setback. Page 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANIVING CONIlVIISSION MEETING Monday,May 16,20ll 6:30 o'clock p.m. Schoenzeit moved,Schwingler seconded,to bring the recommendations of the Planning Commission regarding community/donation gardens and private,residential gardens on a vacant lot forward to the City Council. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. 4. 11-3505 THOMAS McCUNE, 1473 BAY RIDGE ROAD,VARIANCE,8:10 P.M.to 8:16 P.M. . Thomas McCune,Applicant,was present. Curtis stated the applicant is requesting variances from the 30-foot side yard setback requirement in order to construct a new roof on the existing home 2'/11" taller than existing. The pitch of the roof would be increased. A 16.7 foot setback exists on the south side of the home and a 14-foot setback exists on the north side of the home where 30 feet is required. In conjunction with repairing an ice dame issue with the existing roof,the property owner would like to reconstruct the roof over the older portion of their home with a slightly steeper pitch. The resulting increase in height would be an additional2'/11" from the existing roof. The existing home does not meet the 30-foot side setback as required for principal structures within the LR-lA zoning district. Technically the increased roof height in the substandard setback is considered an expansion of an existing nonconformity. No additional side yard setback variances are required in order to do the project as � proposed. As the Planning Commission is aware,there have been multiple changes to law regarding how a municipality must review an application for a variance. The "undue hardship" analysis has been replaced with the"practical difficulties" analysis. Staff is currently working on updating the ordinance to ensure that it conforms to the statutory analysis of practical difficulties. While the current code directs Staff, Planning Commission and the Council to perform a hardship analysis,this application will actually be viewed consistent with the new practical difficulties analysis. The applicants'variance request is reasonable and necessary in order to avoid additional damage to their property caused by ice dams. The proposed addition is a vertical expansion that will result in minimal , additional massing of the house. No additional living space is being proposed and the applicants'request results in minimal negative impact of adjacent properties. Staff finds the location of the.existing home creates a unique circumstance not created by the applicants and that granting the applicants'request is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the ordinances and will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Planning Staff recommends approval of the side setback variances in order to reconstruct the roof as proposed. Alexander stated in her view the request is reasonable. Levang, Schwingler, and Leskinen agreed with Commissioner Alexander. Tom McCune stated the house is a 1,700 square foot rambler with no ventable attic space and very little insulation. All the builders he has spoken to have said that he needs to ventilate it and put more insulation in there along with a steeper pitch. McCune indicated he does not want to encroach on the property line. Page 18 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMNIISSION MEETING Monday,May 16,2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. McCune pointed out there are two or three other homes in the neighborhood that encroach closer to the property line than his house. McCune stated he would like to fix an ice dam problem with this project. Chair Schoenzeit opened the public hearing at 8:15 p.m. There were no public comments concerning this application. Chair Schoenzeit closed the public hearing at 8:15 p.m. Thiesse moved,Levang seconded,to recommend approval of Application#11-3505,Thomas and Martha McCune, 1473 Bay Ridge Road,granting of side setback variances. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. 5. 11-3506 ORONO PUBLIC SCHOOLS,685 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD NORTH, CONDITIONAL USE PERNIIT,8:16 P.M.—8:21 P.M. Curtis stated the Orono Public School intends to construct a new softball field area and is requesting a CUP in order to conduct filling and grading activity on the property. The Orono Schools intend to improve an area of the southernmost property on campus for a new softball field. As a result of the City's Old Crystal Bay Road project,there will be soil material exported out of the roadway area. The school would like to utilize the excess material to improve the grade to prepare for the new softball field. Due to the amount of material proposed, a conditional use pernut is required. Planning Staff recommends approval of the CUP. All of the City Engineer's requirements,including erosion control measures,will be addressed with the administrative land alteration permit following CUP approval. Schoenzeit asked if their approval should not be contingent on the road project. Curtis indicated that would be appropriate. John Osland, Orono Schools, indicated he is here to answer any questions the Planning Commission may have. The school is attempting to put in a new ball field. The school removed two ball fields last year and they are committed to constructing a new field. This field likely will be a junior varsity girls field and it will need to be done in the very near future. Once the school learned there would be excess materials from the road project,they felt this would be a great opportunity to construct the ball field. Osland noted the school will not be accepting any contaminated soils. Chair Schoenzeit opened the public hearing at 8:18 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. � Chair Schoenzeit closed the public hearing at 8:18 p.m. Page ' 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANI�TING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 16,2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. Schoenzeit stated he would add to Staffs recommendations that the project be allowed with or without the road project. Schoenzeit moved,Leskinen seconded,to recommend approval of Application#11-3506 Orono Public Schools,685 Old Crystal Bay Road North,granting of a conditional use permit in conjunction with the City Engineer's requirements. Schoenzeit asked how many yards of fill the school is anticipating needing. Osland indicated they are estimating between six to eight thousand cubic yards. Levang asked what the school will do if the road project does not go forward. Osland indicated they probably would not have done the proj ect this year if the fill was not available and that fill will need to be brought in if the road project does not go forward and that it may be a two year project to bring in the entire required�11. Schoenzeit asked if there is a time limit on the conditional use permit. Curtis indicated there would not be since the pernut runs with the land. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. PLANNING COMIVIISSION COMMENTS 6. REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES ATTENDING CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ON MARCH 28,APRIL 11,APRIL 25,AND MAY 9,2011 ' Leskinen noted the minutes from the March 28,April 11, and Apri125 Council meetings are in the Planning Commission's packet. Curtis noted at the April 11°i meeting,the Council discussed the Your Boat Club application,the Massage Therapy Licensing Ordinance, and the Old Crystal Bay Project. Thiesse stated at the Apri125�'meeting,Bo Carlson addressed the City Council regarding parking along the Dakota Trail. The trail is highly popular but parking along the trial is not sufficient. A number of residents were in attendance at the meeting to voice their concerns and to give their input on the parking situation. Ralph Kempf gave a presentation on Navarre to the Council. Schoenzeit reported on the May 9°i Council meeting and noted that a resolution of recognition was given to Michelle Winer for her service on the Planning Commission. The LMCD gave a detailed presentation on their activities in 2010,the activities planned for 2011, and their upcoming 2012 budget. Levang commented that some people had the impression that the milfoil would be eradicated and it was clarified at the meeting that the milfoil cannot be completely eradicated and will need to be managed. Page 20� MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANI�TING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 16,2011 ' , 6:30 o'clock p.m. Schoenzeit stated the City Council discussed the appointments to the hardcover task force and eventually decided to appoint all of the Orono residents to the task force who had volunteered. Curtis indicated she spoke with Loren Schoenzeit on the appointment to the hardcover task force and that it was initially recommended by some on the City Council that all interested Planning Commission members should participate,but that the final decision was to appoint one representative from the City Council and one representative from the Planning Commission in order to allow for more Orono residents to sit on the task force. Curtis noted that the Planning Commission will be regularly updated on the discussions of the task force. Schoenzeit noted the City Council went into closed session on May 9th to discuss the job evaluation of the city administrator. 7. OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION None 8. SELECTION OF REPRESENTATIVES TO ATTEND CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ON MAY 23,2011,AND JUNE 13,2011 , � May 23,2011 -Thiesse � June 13,2011 -Leskinen ADJOURNMENT Leskinen moved,Schwingler seconded,to adjourn the Orono Planning Commission meeting at 8:33 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. 't �' rzA ,/;,� - 2a (( , Loren Schoenzeit,Chair Page 21