The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07-21-2014 Planning Commission Packet PUBLIC ATTENDANCE MEETING DATE 7- al-iy O COUNCIL PA PLANNING COMMISSION 0 OTHER Assistive Listening Device available upon request. Please complete the following information for City records,. PRESENT FOR(from agenda) NAME (please print) ADDRESS NAME OR NUMBER t i i• \ Ylit(lii 1( .1 \ t 1 -- 1 1 t\ ' 1 % LI \ l')VA-.t ;-/-4 v7) -1 C (al L., ZOO i: I( --;-`2.)6 * ri 1 --7-- 3. /4-i il ' / ii ) crt)4y- LV&, C A V E. NI IA 4. -J \i'y h y : ,1 c '?f• ' cciic'eklio I/ ,,-, 5. / , _) lez\7`-c,4„1 (..1-",-31 I 1 ( '1,14,:,/yi ,Y-) ) ( -1 6. /14f -iz ,,t-er /- cC '4- ¼( I/t../.1 (-. V 7. )k;41/4,vs...l -\\V,,,,.....) ) II 6 t\I t..\\ 0-\ \\), 8. ./-1 ,-/ii,:-/t-/ii 11I lAdi K ij;3,-k y 9. r)t..z.,.., - ii-s;tg----- TI -A.') L-4 ..,,,.: 1 0 .., I•iiiz, < 0 r44, 0,1 l. c,,....-tiz„)k' ; (/, , , <1 ,_ / j"-- 11. / ci:L.L. L/ - ")/ (_ 0>4 ' -. 1" ---1,) (72 f(-(.., / , 12. t'A, ..L -11‘.---,- -it. , ,,,t,1 ‘......,(,,k --v-< . . . IfL,_. ,iti $ L k 13. 14. 15. V:\(LEGAL FORMS)\(FORMS)\PUBLIC ATTENDANCE.DOC Sign up for email notifications at www.ci.orono.mn.us – follow links for Stay Connected & Email Notifications AGENDA City of Orono Planning Commission Meeting for July 21, 2014; 6:30 PM Orono Council Chambers, 2780 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356 952-249-4600 / www.ci.orono.mn.us Council Representative: Mayor McMillan Audience Members: Please sign in for the public record if you wish to address the Planning Commission. The sign in sheet is in the lobby. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet – located in the lobby near the sign in sheet. Items on the Consent Agenda, including (*) asterisk items, are reviewed in total by the Planning Commission and may be approved through one motion with no further discussion by the Planning Commission. Any items may be removed by any Planning Commission Member, staff member or person from the public for separate consideration. If you wish to remove any item from the Consent Agenda, please state the item number and description of the item. Applicants will be asked to move to the podium to answer questions after staff presents the application. The Planning Commission is an advisory body to the City Council. If action is taken on any items on this agenda, they will be scheduled for an upcoming City Council meeting. Consent Agenda * 1. Approval of Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of June 16, 2014. New Business 2. 13-3645 3. 14-3655 Gary Briggs, 1905 Concordia Street & Brian Sundstrom, 1895 Concordia Street, Conditional Use Permit & Variance (Staff: Melanie Curtis) Joe & Donelle Feldmann, 805 Forest Arms Lane, Variance (Staff: Melanie Curtis) 4. 14-3675 Ryan & Stacy Alness, XXX Elmwood Ave/PID 07-117-23-11-0027, Variances (Staff: Mike Gaffron) 5. 14-3676 Lakeshore Holdings, LLC, 2470 & 2490 Carmen Street, Lot Line Rearrangement (Staff: Melanie Curtis) 6. 14-3677 Paul Johncox, Zoning Code Amendment in the B-1 District Uses (Staff: Melanie Curtis) Planning Commission Comments 7. Report from Planning Commission representatives on City Council meetings: June 23, 2014 and July 14, 2014. 8. Other issues for discussion. ADJOURNMENT MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, June 16, 2014 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 18 ROLL CALL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Chair Denise Leskinen, Commissioners Kevin Landgraver, Bruce Lemke, Loren Schoenzeit, and John Thiesse. Representing Staff were Community Developer Director Andrew Mack, Assistant City Administrator of Long-Term Strategic Planning Senior Planner Michael Gaffron, Planning Coordinator Melanie Curtis, and Recorder Jackie Young. City Council Member Cynthia Bremer was present. Commissioner Christopher McGrann arrived at 7:35 p.m. Chair Leskinen called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. CONSENT AGENDA Landgraver moved, Thiesse seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *1. APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 19, 2014 Landgraver moved, Thiesse seconded, to approve the minutes of the Orono Planning Commission meeting of May 19, 2014, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. NEW BUSINESS 2. #14-3666 LUKE KUJAWA ON BEHALF OF EOF INVESTMENTS, LLC, 1440 AND 1442 SHORELINE DRIVE, REZONING, 6:33 P.M. – 7:34 P.M. Gaffron stated the applicant is requesting approval for rezoning of two parcels located at 1440 and 1442 Shoreline Drive from LR-1A single-family residential to B-2 commercial business. At the May Planning Commission meeting, the site plan was reviewed and how it might relate to a rezoning of the properties. The Planning Commission voted 6-0 to table the application pending further discussion on the concept of a B-2 subdistrict at the June 4 work session. While the B-2 sub-district was discussed at the work session, no formal action was taken. Planning Staff supports approval of a rezoning from residential to commercial, with the elements of the commercial zoning yet to be determined. Gaffron stated the change in zoning does require a Comprehensive Plan Amendment since these two properties are zoned and guided for residential purposes. The past history of limited City sanctioned commercial use and their adjacency to a single-family residence at 1432 Shoreline Drive lends a degree of difficulty in solidifying the applicant’s ability to essentially use the property for marina use. The City, for a number of decades, has essentially required that the 1440 and 1442 properties be allowed to be used for marina parking. Gaffron indicated there are potential negative impacts associated with expansion of the commercial marina use and those impacts are greatest to the property owner at 1432 Shoreline Drive. The Planning Commission had indicated at its previous meeting that some middle ground rather than a full-fledged rezoning to B-2 may be appropriate and worth investigating. Gaffron indicated a B-2 subdistrict could be structured in the zoning code in a similar manner as other subdistricts. Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 Approval of Planning Commission Minutes 06/16/14 [Page 1 of 18] MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, June 16, 2014 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 2 of 18 Gaffron stated the City does have other sub-districts, such as the LR-1C-1 district that allows for a 50 percent increase in dwelling unit density, and the RR-1B district , which is a two-acre single-family zoning district. An example of the RR-1B-1 district was the former Springhill Conference Center on County Road 6, which was rezoned back to RR-1B when it converted to a golf course. Gaffron stated in both of those instances, an additional use was added to the primary district to create the subdistrict. The concept of a B-2 subdistrct as recently discussed would reduce rather than increase the list of allowed uses. Under the City’s current code, the planned development options are Planned Residential Development and Residential Planned Unit Development, which are only applicable to residential use. The Planned Unit Development code section, which has been applied for a number of commercial properties along Highway 12, only applies to the Highway 12 corridor. Under the City’s current code, no options for a commercial PUD currently exist outside the Highway 12 corridor. Gaffron stated based on those three options, none of those would be applicable to a commercial PUD. The intent of a B-2 subdistrict would be limiting or avoiding the negative impacts to adjoining residential properties that would be created by certain marina uses. The Planning Commission has discussed limiting it to properties where a certain set of conditions might exist, such as proximity to an existing B-2 district or a recent history of city-sanctioned commercial use. Gaffron stated this is probably one of the only properties that have those two characteristics. The former service station parcel addressed at 1960 Shoreline Drive across from North Shore Drive Marina East at Spatts Avenue and County Road 15 is one other property that possibly could fall under that designation as well as the DNR-owned property. It would be Staff’s goal to have a B-2 subdistrict that does not allow expansion of existing marinas into adjoining residentially zoned properties that have not had some level of City-sanctioned commercial use. The Planning Commission, at its June work session, explored a number of goals for a B-2 subdistrictand include the following: 1. Increased buffering to adjacent residential properties, which should include increased setback for parking and enhanced vegetative or other screening. 2. Angled parking or some other parking orientation that minimizes headlight impact to neighbors, such as one-way traffic patterns. 3. Limited uses to parking/buffers/stormwater management. 4. No buildings allowed. 5. Dry-stacking abutting residential should not be allowed. 6. Disallow uses that would generate hazardous waste. 7. Increased regulations regarding site lighting. 8. Increased setback for docks from extended adjacent lot residential lines and/or place added regulation on orientation of slips to limit impact on neighbors. A review of the LMCD dock Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 Approval of Planning Commission Minutes 06/16/14 [Page 2 of 18] MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, June 16, 2014 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 3 of 18 codes should be done to determine whether they already address this in a manner acceptable to the City. 9. While the submitted site plan is recognized as conceptual in nature, this site has a history of continually evolving and the City should look forward in time to understand the potential ultimate impacts of what is allowed within the context of a B-2 subdistrict. Gaffron noted a number of concepts and concerns were brought up by the public, the Planning Commissioners, and Staff during the May 19 meeting as well as the work session related to the specific rezoning application for this site and the submitted site plan. Those items are as follows: 1. Should the 1440 property remain residentially zoned as a buffer to the neighboring property; i.e., as a transitional property. 2. By reducing the proposed parking by six stalls, a buffer of 30 feet to the residential property could be achieved. 3. The Comprehensive Plan Amendment that would necessarily accompany a rezoning from residential use to commercial use could incorporate standards and limitations for use of the site. 4. Because these two properties are and have been a hybrid of residential and commercial uses, neither the applicant nor the neighbor should expect that their future will be completely commercial or completely residential. Both parties need to be accommodated. 5. If future buildings or changes to the physical aspects of the site were proposed in the future, a commercial site plan review/approval process would be required and would need Council approval. Gaffron stated if the Planning Commission concludes that it would be appropriate to pursue the creation of a B-2 subdistrict, it would be appropriate at this time to formalize that recommendation and direct that Staff bring it to the City Council for approval to move ahead. Creation of a new zoning district is a process over which the Council has a great deal of discretion and the Planning Commission should have Council’s approval before spending additional effort on this topic. Gaffron noted a letter was received from Timothy Keane, Attorney-at-Law, who represents the neighbors to the marina. Thiesse asked if the number of parking stalls being reduced is six or eight. Gaffron stated it is likely a total of eight, which leaves the back-up area. Thiesse stated the other one along the property line could also be eliminated. Lemke noted removal of that parking space would provide an additional 20 feet of buffer. Gaffron stated the whole row of parking along could be eliminated along the property line or elsewhere. Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 Approval of Planning Commission Minutes 06/16/14 [Page 3 of 18] MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, June 16, 2014 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 4 of 18 Schoenzeit asked whether any zoning change from residential to commercial is always accompanied by a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and which would happen first. Gaffron stated technically the Comprehensive Plan Amendment should precede the rezoning. In this case a Comprehensive Plan Amendment was not initially applied for but it is clear that the City cannot take any action on the rezoning until or at least there is a Comprehensive Plan Amendment happening at the same time. Schoenzeit asked what became broken in this situation that caused it to require fixing now. Gaffron stated there are a couple of reasons that it is not logical to continue with the existing situation. One of them has to do with dock locations and the fact that in order to make docks more conforming with LMCD code, the setbacks would need to be complied with and the rezoning would help that situation. The second factor is if you look at what exists on the site, there is a building in very poor condition and an existing residence that is currently being rented out. Both of those buildings are limited in how they can be used residentially due to the parking agreement that is in effect that utilizes all the parking for the residences. Gaffron stated the ability to make some positive changes to the site based on the rezoning is something that would be useful to both the applicant and the City as well as perhaps the neighborhood by reducing the number of access points to County Road 15 to one location. Circulation on the site is also poor and forces any commercial use of the residential sites to maneuver by using a number of backing movements. In addition, there are no clearly defined limits from a practical perspective on how many cars can fit into that area. Gaffron stated the only way to get 26 cars in that area is to double stack the parking, which would require a person to be on staff full-time. Gaffron indicated the ability to require some stormwater management for the gravel parking area would also come along with a rezoning and that currently the City does not have an easy way to require some of those changes. Schoenzeit asked if all the activities that are currently taking place on the property have been grandfathered in. Gaffron indicated that is correct and that it then becomes a question of whether the activities have truly been grandfathered in and whether the use has changed. Gaffron noted the activities have been an issue for the neighbor and that changing the layout creates the opportunity to eliminate some of the past uses. Schoenzeit stated what he is hearing is that the best way for the City to gain some concessions is under the zoning change. Gaffron indicated that is correct. Leskinen asked if the possibility of a residential subdistrict is a viable solution. Gaffron stated there are a number of obstacles to a residential subdistrict as well as a commercial subdistrict. Gaffron indicated Staff has not given a residential subdistrict a lot of thought but that he would prefer not to create a residential subdistrictfor properties that have been used commercially. Chair Leskinen opened the public hearing at 6:56 p.m. Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 Approval of Planning Commission Minutes 06/16/14 [Page 4 of 18] MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, June 16, 2014 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 18 Richard Anderson, Orono, stated he owns the marina next to this marina. Anderson stated what broke that requires redoing is the fact that the site is only 1.08 acres total and there are a number of business activities going on. The site has one of the biggest Yamaha dealers in the country filling up the parking lot with retail boat sales as well as the biggest boat club organization in possibly the five-state area, which also requires extra parking. Anderson stated when he owned the marina, there was not one boat parked on the bituminous that is currently slated for parking, not one boat parked in the residential area at any time, and it was controlled because there was not a major retail operation or a boat club. Anderson stated this site could easily handle the docks that exist but not all the other uses that are going on. Anderson stated the City should let him tear the residential buildings down and create extra parking but that does not mean the City needs to create a separate subdistrict. The least that should be done is make one of the residential properties commercial and leave the other one residential. Anderson reiterated that one acre of land is not enough land for all of these activities and does not support the amount of retail and activity that is happening on the site. Anderson stated for anyone who has visited the area, they will see that the majority of the bituminous parking lot is filled with boats. People park on the street going the wrong way. Anderson stated there is way too much activity on the site whether it is commercial or residential, which is why this situation is broken. Anderson stated if the residential lots are converted to commercial, the amount of activity on the site will only increase. Matt Johnson, 1432 Shore Line Drive, stated his first observation is that a significant portion of the parking that exists is under water currently near the gas tank and that the water only intensifies on the other side of the road. Johnson noted the conditional use permit that exists now does not allow for boat storage but boats are stored on the residential properties every day and a big pontoon was placed there today. Johnson stated what he has noticed is that as the site becomes more and more used and the number of activities are increased, the existing conditional use permit is not being followed or enforced. Johnson indicated a car has been parked on the adjoining residential lot for a week with grass growing up as high as the tires. Johnson stated the idea of changing this to commercial would allow them just simply to move their docks, which is not the right reason to make the change. Johnson stated maintaining the residential zoning and having a better defined, more practical conditional use permit would solve more problems than rezoning, which would only allow them to push more docks to the north. Johnson stated at the last meeting, when the question came up about the timeline, the owner said they did not have the funds available to do this for the next few years. Johnson stated the City is talking about making a pretty extraordinary change even though the applicant does not have the means to make all the improvements. Johnson stated in his view the best thing to do at this point is to table the application and have the applicant come back with a specific plan so it can be properly evaluated. Tim Keane, Attorney-at-Law, stated he is appearing on behalf of the nearby residential property owners. Keane stated what exists is a narrow piece of land that is divided by a county state aid highway that is a major collector street serving the south and north. The road experiences great volumes of traffic as well as truck traffic. Keane stated that narrow piece of land that is divided by the thoroughfare is supporting way more activity than what is appropriate to the land capability. Keane stated it is only by placing extraordinary burdens on the roadway and surface water that the commercial operation can enjoy the intensity of use that drives their business. Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 Approval of Planning Commission Minutes 06/16/14 [Page 5 of 18] MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, June 16, 2014 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 6 of 18 Keane stated the current residential designation of the two lots serves as something of a buffer and that in their view the City does have some control over the situation given the residential designation and the conditional use permit if it is properly enforced. Keane stated in his view Commissioner Schoenzeit asked the $64,000 question of what became broke that now requires fixing. Keane stated dock locations should not drive a land use application and that moving the docks further to the north will only increase the activity closer to the residential lots and encroaches on the enjoyment of the property to the residential property owners. Keane stated the City should rely on the current zoning and that the existing condition is one where there is already five pounds of sugar in a two-pound bag. Keane stated allowing increased intensity and additional use on this site will only burden the surrounding property owners and that he does not see any benefit to the adjacent property owners or the traveling public on County Road 15. Keane stated the only benefit that will occur out of this is to the owners of the marina who are requesting the rezoning, which is not a sufficient public purpose for driving the zoning amendment. Keane stated a question was also asked regarding the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Keane stated the City adopts the Comprehensive Plan and it is a legislative document. Any consideration of an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan should be a predicate. Keane stated the zoning ordinance implements the Comprehensive Plan and the Comprehensive Plan does not follow the City’s zoning decisions but is the big overall picture. Keane stated those are policy decisions that are made by the Planning Commission and implemented by the City Council. Keane stated the City should implement the policies that have been adopted in the Comprehensive Plan and that it is similar to the tail wagging the dog to suggest that the Comprehensive Plan Amendment is an after-thought. Keane stated a Comprehensive Plan Amendment should not be an after-thought and that there are regional consequences to these decisions that will impact the lake and the road as well as the residential properties. John Goodin, President of EOF Investments, stated he owns River Valley Power and Sports. Goodin indicated he has been in operation at this site since the fall of 2012 with his retail operation. Goodin stated for the record, he would like the Planning Commission to know that prior to River Valley signing their lease in the fall of 2012, the largest marine dealer operated in this building for 12 years. Goodin stated they are the absolutely largest dealer in the country and that they did significant more retail than they do. Goodin noted at one time that retailer leased from Mr. Anderson until he sold the marina to a different gentleman. Goodin noted the boat club has been in operation at this site for four seasons and that in his view for the most part it has operated fairly well. Goodin stated for the other 40 weeks out of the year, the site is pretty quiet. Goodin stated he will admit that for approximately four weeks this spring the activity at the marina was pretty intense given the weather, but that he has yet to hear or see a written complaint about how the property is being used improperly or how the property looks. Goodin stated he is not aware that they are doing anything wrong as the retailer. Goodin stated in terms of parking, the boat club hired a valet service last year, which was a significant improvement over 2011 and 2012. Goodin indicated he is not aware of any complaints, and that in his view, if there were complaints, they were remedied rather quickly. Goodin stated based on the high water levels currently, there will likely not be any real intensive use over the next couple of weeks. Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 Approval of Planning Commission Minutes 06/16/14 [Page 6 of 18] MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, June 16, 2014 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 7 of 18 Goodin stated the question of what caused this and why is it broke was raised earlier. Goodin stated at the end of the day, they entered into a purchase agreement but that Mr. Anderson was also bidding to purchase the property. Goodin indicated his understanding is that they outbid Mr. Anderson and that in his view there is some regret since all of a sudden there is a complaint to the LMCD regarding the docks that have been in place for 35 years. Goodin noted Mr. Anderson once owned the marina that they are now operating but that all of a sudden the docks are a problem. Goodin encouraged the Planning Commission to keep that in perspective. Goodin stated they are still attempting to figure out what they are doing wrong and that they have only owned the residential properties technically for nine months. Goodin stated over that time they have improved the property by painting and installing new docks, landscaping, and lighting. Goodin stated they also have a very solid customer base that enjoys their marina and that they would like to do more to improve the property and the neighborhood. Goodin stated they are looking at a couple of residential homes that are not in good condition and that they would like to improve the area. Goodin stated it is not the nicest looking piece of property in Orono and that their plan is to improve the property. Goodin stated the point of this process is to determine whether this is something the City wants to rezone; and if so, then the City would work with the property owners through that process. Goodin noted they are asking to take two residential homes, one of which is a rental home, and change the tax classification to a higher rate, but in return the City will have a significantly improved piece of property. Goodin stated they are trying to make the situation better and that they are operating two businesses that employ a number of people. Goodin stated in his view some of this has been exaggerated and is a result of jealousy, but that at the end of the day, it is still the United States of America and that they appreciate all the time and effort the City has spent on their application. Richard Anderson stated the dock situation has nothing to do with the City of Orono and that when he was pursuing purchase of the property, he asked the LMCD if the docks were conforming and whether a permit would be approved in the spring. Anderson stated if he believed that he couldnot put those docks in, he would not have bid on the property and that he bid on what he thought he could generate for income from the docks. Anderson stated when the LMCD allows them to operate those docks in a nonconforming manner, that is not equal justice and that his complaint is with the LMCD. Anderson stated for the City to attempt to rezone this area to relocate those docks is unheard of. Anderson stated in all the time that he has lived in Orono has the LMCD or the City of Orono ever done anything to help alleviate the dock situation. Anderson stated his complaints regarding the activities on this property have nothing to do with his bid on the property. Chair Leskinen closed the public hearing at 7:20 p.m. Schoenzeit asked if there are documented violations of the conditional use permit currently. Gaffron indicated Staff has been provided with photographs on various occasions depicting cars that are parked in places where they should not be. Gaffron noted the site was granted different variance approvals in the early 1980s and that it has not always operated under a conditional use permit. Gaffron stated Staff will need to review the original approvals see what specific things have not always been complied with and that part of the problem is that from day to day and hour to hour the situation changes and that it is impossible to reasonably enforce something like that. Gaffron stated Staff is not able to go out there on a daily basis but that in his view the applicants will agree that there are times when they are Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 Approval of Planning Commission Minutes 06/16/14 [Page 7 of 18] MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, June 16, 2014 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 8 of 18 out of conformity with their parking. Gaffron noted the marina operates for 12 weeks out of a 52-week year and that there needs to be a balance between the expectations of the neighbors and the marina. Schoenzeit asked if the use of the property has ebbed and flowed over the years or whether it has regularly increased. Gaffron stated there have been a number of owners over the years, and that when Jim Rivers owned the property, Staff encountered some problems, butthat for the most part the marina has not been an issue. At one point Jim Rivers had a neighbor who was aware of what was there and the City did not receive complaints. Gaffron indicated at times through the years it has been an issue but that until the last year or two, the City has not experienced a large number of complaints. Gaffron stated the marina now has a residential owner who has an expectation that the City will be enforcing the conditional use permit on a daily basis, which is not something that Staff can do. Gaffron stated Staff is attempting to accomplish a happy medium for the residential owners by cleaning up the two residential properties and improving the parking situation. Lemke indicated he visited the site yesterday and that the commercial use is pretty intense. Lemke stated the layout of the site does not work and that it needs organization and access control. In terms of the benefit of the City, it would make sense to make that area a parking lot but that he is not certain of the number of parking spaces. Lemke indicated he also does not like the amount of hardcover next to the lake but that the current situation is not working out due to a number of factors. Leskinen stated she is in agreement that the site does not work and that there have been a number of drivers on this particular issue over the past few months. The Planning Commission has heard a litany of complaints about the residential building on the property that is unoccupied and that clearly having a dilapidated building or unusable building on the property will only intensify the blight. Leskinen stated increasing the parking and fixing the intensity of the property would be the way to go but that she does not agree with a straight rezoning to B-2. Leskinen stated if the City were to go in the direction of a rezoning, she would be more in favor of a subdistrict where the City would have stronger controls and that there should not be an intensification of the use of the property. Landgraver stated he does agree that the use of the property needs to be looked at now that all of the properties are under common ownership. Landgraver stated the greatest leverage the City would gain is a subdivision that articulates the fact that this is a commercial piece of property abutting a residential piece of property and that there needs to be extraordinary limitations on use and requirements to create a buffer of noise and light and other irritants. Landgraver indicated he is inclined to continue to recommend to the City Council the creation of a subdistrict with limitations on uses and requirements for screening. Thiesse stated he also is in agreement with what has already been said but that in his view the docks should not drive zoning. Thiesse stated organization of the area and access to the area is poor and should be improved upon but that he has not heard anything tonight that has not been raised earlier. Thiesse stated in his view it is not in the City’s best interests to rezone the property until there is a specific plan presented. Thiesse stated if the applicant wants to put parking on the residential properties, that would be fine as long as the parking plan presented works, but that the City should not allow anything else on the residential properties. Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 Approval of Planning Commission Minutes 06/16/14 [Page 8 of 18] MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, June 16, 2014 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 9 of 18 Leskinen stated she is in agreement and that it might not be an option for the Planning Commission to recommend a full rezoning at this stage. Leskinen stated in his view the best and only option is to let the City Council know that the Planning Commission is leaning toward a rezoning to some sort of subdistrict in an attempt to appease everybody to the best extent they can but that the Planning Commission needs the City Council’s blessing to move forward with the subdistrict rezoning. Leskinen stated she also does not know if keeping the situation the way it is is worthwhile and that she would recommend the Planning Commission pursuecreation of a subdistrict based on approval by the City Council. Lemke moved, Landgraver seconded, Application No. 14-3666, Luke Kujawa on Behalf of EOF Investments, LLC, 1440 and 1442 Shoreline Drive, Rezoning, that the Planning Commission recommends that the City pursue the creation of a B-2 subdistrict to act as a transition zone between commercial marina properties and adjacent residential properties, and that the Planning Commission requests Council approval for the Planning Commission to proceed with formulation of appropriate standards for such a subdistrict. Schoenzeit stated the motion should also address the sequencing with the Comprehensive Plan Lemke amended his motion, Landgraver seconded, Application No. 14-3666, Luke Kujawa on Behalf of EOF Investments, LLC, 1440 and 1442 Shoreline Drive, Rezoning, that the Planning Commission recommends that the City pursue the creation of a B-2 subdistrict to act as a transition zone between commercial marina properties and adjacent residential properties, and that the Planning Commission requests Council approval for the Planning Commission to proceed with formulation of appropriate standards for such a subdistrict, and to recommend that the process of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment be commenced prior to any rezoning taking place. Thiesse asked if the motion can be more site specific. Thiesse indicated he has a concern the City may be setting themselves up to this happening on other marinas throughout the City. Leskinen noted the motion is just to have the Council’s blessing to explore the creation of a B-2 subdistrict. Thiesse stated they are looking to create a transition zone between commercial marina properties and residential properties, which is throughout the City and not just specifically this property. Gaffron stated in his view a Comprehensive Plan Amendment could be site specific even though some members of the public would like it to be city-wide. Gaffron noted the City Council has a great deal of discretion in deciding which properties should be rezoned and that any similar properties would have to go through the same rezoning process. Gaffron stated the City has been site specific in the past with Comprehensive Plan Amendments and that it is his belief any Comprehensive Plan Amendment that moves forward would be for this specific property but that other properties could make the same type of application. Gaffron stated a subdistrict could be created for this specific property and that language could be built into the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and the rezoning giving the City the ability to limit the types of properties that could be included in the subdistrct. Leskinen asked if the Planning Commission can go forward with the creation of a subdistrict since there is not a Comprehensive Plan Amendment before the Planning Commission tonight. Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 Approval of Planning Commission Minutes 06/16/14 [Page 9 of 18] MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, June 16, 2014 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 10 of 18 Gaffron stated there needs to be the correct sequence but that what the Planning Commission is motioning tonight is to have the City Council authorize the Planning Commission to look at studying the creation of a B-2 subdistrict. Gaffron stated if the City Council does not authorize the Planning Commission to proceed forward with studying the creation of a B-2 subdistrict, the Planning Commission would need to vote on whether the property should be zoned to a straight B-2 district. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Gaffron noted this application will be on the City Council’s agenda for June 23. 3. #14-3672 REVOLUTION DESIGN AND BUILD ON BEHALF OF KELLY AND MELODEE MARX, 3135 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, VARIANCE, 7:35 P.M. – 7:47 P.M. Sid Levin, Applicant, was present. Curtis stated the applicant is requesting a lake setback variance in order to construct a second-story addition over a portion of the existing home and an attic area above the garage within 75 feet of Lake Minnetonka due to the lagoon. The home is located approximately 50 feet from the lagoon and is considered a legal nonconforming structure with respect to the lake setback. The home was constructed in 1973, prior to establishment of the City’s current zoning code requirement for a 75-foot structural setback from the lake. Over the years modifications have been made to the property through variances and other city approvals. A screen porch is also proposed to be constructed under the existing above-grade deck. The addition of the screen porch is not considered an expansion of a non-conformity as the deck is currently considered an above-grade structure. The increased mass of the addition will be screened by the existing vegetation along North Shore Drive and will be relatively hidden from views from neighboring properties due to the existing vegetation and orientation of the neighboring homes. Curtis stated the proposed project will result in additional massing within allowed levels but the applicant is not proposing to increase the structural coverage level. The overall hardcover level for the property is conforming at 19.3 percent. However, approximately 3,000 square feet of structural hardcover exists within 75 feet of the lake. The applicant is not proposing an increase in hardcover. Staff finds that the 75-foot lake setback variance to allow construction of the addition appears to be reasonable and consistent with similar residential properties in the area. The existing orientation of the adjacent and subject homes as well as vegetation on the property should serve to address or mitigate any negative visual impacts. The additions appear to be reasonable and consistent with similar residential properties in the area. The proposed additions are conforming with respect to structural coverage, overall hardcover and massing regulations. The creation of the additional square footage within the home’s existing footprint will not be a detriment to neighboring properties, nor will the addition impact the light, air and open space of the location. The existing home’s proximity to the lagoon and the orientation of the home serve as a practical difficulty to constructing a conforming living space addition. Planning Staff recommends approval of the setback variance to permit construction of a second story over a portion of the existing home and attic over the garage within 75 feet of the OHWL. The Planning Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 Approval of Planning Commission Minutes 06/16/14 [Page 10 of 18] MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, June 16, 2014 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 11 of 18 Commission should open the public hearing and discuss the lake setback variance request. The published legal notice incorrectly listed the requested variances as average lakeshore setback and rear setback variances. The only variance required is a lake setback variance. An additional, corrected public hearing will be held at the July 14 City Council meeting. Leskinen asked if the Planning Commission should make a formal recommendation to the City Council since another public hearing is required to be held. Curtis stated to her knowledge the Planning Commission can make a formal recommendation. Curtis stated the overlay of the existing home is reflected on the overhead by the dotted line. Schoenzeit asked if the additions affect the view of the lake from the neighboring properties. Curtis indicated the subject residence is well behind the average lakeshore setback. Schoenzeit stated the flip side would be if either of the neighbors were proposing this same project, the subject property would have the right to say that they are affecting their view. Curtis displayed an aerial photograph of the area. Curtis noted the subject house is well behind the average lakeshore setback and the two residences on either side of this property are located closer to the lakeshore. Landgraver asked if any of the neighbors have contacted Staff with any concerns. Curtis stated they have not and that if any concerns are raised by the neighbors following the new, corrected publish notice, she will bring those concerns to the City Council. Chair Leskinen opened the public hearing at 7:42 p.m. Sid Levin, Applicant, stated he is the builder/designer representing the property owners. Levin stated the natural lakeshore is approximately 280 feet away from the closest portion of the porch on the subject house, which is well set back from its neighbors on both sides and will not obstruct their views. As it relates to drainage, Levin stated he spoke with the Watershed District and they indicated they have no concerns with drainage since the proposal is merely to construct over what exists. Levin stated the survey also reflects that trees line the property on all sides and that the proposal will be well hidden by the existing vegetation on the property. Levin stated if the lagoon were not there, it would not be necessary to bring this proposal before the Planning Commission. Chair Leskinen closed the public hearing at 7:45 p.m. Leskinen stated in her view the proposal is reasonable and the application is pretty straight forward. Leskinen indicated she does not have any problems with the request. McGrann indicated he is in agreement with Chair Leskinen. Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 Approval of Planning Commission Minutes 06/16/14 [Page 11 of 18] MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, June 16, 2014 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 12 of 18 Landgraver stated he initially had a concern with the massing, but given the lack of any objection by the neighbors and the existing vegetation, he would not be opposed to the request. Leskinen stated any concerns she had with increasing the non-conformity were addressed in Staff’s report. Schoenzeit moved, McGrann seconded, to recommend approval of Application No. 14-3672, Revolution Design and Build on behalf of Kelly and Melodee Marx, 3135 North Shore Drive, granting of a lake setback variance subject to Staff recommendations. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. 4. #14-3673 JUSTIN MCCY ON BEHALF OF ORONO PUBLIC SCHOOL ISD 278, 685, 765, 795, AND 800 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD NORTH, 7:47 P.M. – 7:55 P.M. Justin McCoy, Applicant, was present. Curtis stated Orono Public Schools is proposing to install a total of four monument signs identifying each of the Orono School properties along Old Crystal Bay Road North. Each of the signs will be four feet wide and eight feet tall. The signs will be constructed of a blue aluminum cabinet. The signs are not proposed to have internal illumination and are proposed to be set back from the street property line ten feet, which is consistent with a business or commercial sign setback, and five feet more than the residential district sign regulations require. A conditional use permit is necessary due to the signage size area and the number of signs proposed. Conditionally permitted uses within R Districts are permitted one sign per use up to 12 square feet of sign area. Based on the sign plan provided, the sign copy area portion of the monument signs are approximately 14 square feet on each side for each side. An additional variance is required based on the style and materials of the proposed signs. The monument sign criteria dictate that the monument sign base should be comprised of materials similar in appearance to the principal structure and should consist of brick, stucco, natural stone or other durable materials. Staff finds that variances to allow the proposed signage to be installed on the various school properties identifying each site would be appropriate. The signage size and number appears to be reasonable and consistent with similar institutional properties in the City and other schools in the greater community. The existing readerboard monument sign on the corner of Wayzata Boulevard and Old Crystal Bay Road conforms more closely to the City’s monument sign criteria. The Planning Commission should discuss the entrance identification or directional signage materials and whether or not they are appropriate and designed to meet the intent of the Code. Signage by its very nature is designed to have a visual impact. The Planning Commission should discuss the proposed signage and determine if the materials, size, and /or number of signs will result in a negative visual impact that should be modified or mitigated in some way. Planning Staff recommends approval of the variances for sign size and the number of signs per use, as well as the conditional use permit to install the signs according to the general site plan provided. The Planning Commission should discuss the variance regarding the use of materials and direct the applicant accordingly. Building permits will be required prior to installation of signage. Lemke asked if the signs will be lit. Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 Approval of Planning Commission Minutes 06/16/14 [Page 12 of 18] MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, June 16, 2014 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 13 of 18 McCoy indicated the signs will not be lit. McGrann asked if the signs are necessary because people are having difficulty finding the correct school. McCoy stated the signs are intended to help visitors locate the correct campus. Leskinen asked if there is a particular reason for going with the blue sign rather than the brick and stucco. McCoy stated the biggest issue was the cost and that brick and stucco would require footings. McCoy stated the school’s long-range plan is to construct a brick and stucco monument sign on the north end at some point. McCoy indicated these signs are more directional signs once a person accesses the campus from either end. Leskinen asked if the signs will be constructed out of metal. McCoy indicated they will be constructed out of aluminum. Thiesse asked if the signs will extend down to the grade. McCoy indicated they will. Schoenzeit asked if the school district paid an application fee. McCoy stated they will need to pay the fee. Chair Leskinen opened the public hearing at 7:52 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Chair Leskinen closed the public hearing at 7:52 p.m. Leskinen stated she has no huge problems with the application given the uniqueness of the school district and the fact that there are no residences in the immediate area. Leskinen stated she understands the desire not to construct the signs out of brick. Landgraver stated in his view the signs will be an improvement and will assist visitors to the school campus. McGrann indicated he is in agreement with Commissioner Landgraver. Thiesse stated if the sign is going to be run all the way to the ground with only a frost footing in the middle of the sign, there will be problems with the signs heaving. Thiesse stated he would recommend either raising the sign or putting a frost footing under the entire sign. Landgraver asked if Commissioner Thiesse is requesting that be made part of the motion. Thiesse indicated he is not. Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 Approval of Planning Commission Minutes 06/16/14 [Page 13 of 18] MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, June 16, 2014 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 14 of 18 Landgraver moved, Thiesse seconded, to recommend approval of Application No. 14-3673, Justin McCoy on behalf of Orono Public School ISD 278, 685, 765, 795, and 800 Old Crystal Bay Road North, granting of a sign variance and a conditional use permit to install four signs according to the submitted sign plan. Schoenzeit suggested the motion be amended to make the recommendation that the City of Orono refund the application fee given the mission and resources of the institution. Landgraver amended his motion, Thiesse seconded, to recommend approval of Application No. 14- 3673, Justin McCoy on behalf of Orono Public School ISD 278, 685, 765, 795, and 800 Old Crystal Bay Road North, granting of a sign variance and a conditional use permit to install four signs according to the submitted sign plan, with the recommendation that the City of Orono waive the application fee. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. 5. #14-3674 LORI GHERARDI ON BEHALF OF WOLVERTON PLACE, LLC, 4570 WOLVERTON PLACE, VACATION OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT, 7:55 P.M. – 8:15 P.M. Lori Gherardi, Applicant, was present. Curtis stated in 2012, the City approved a subdivision which divided the then 10-acre parcel into two five-acre parcels. The initial parcel was addressed 4550 Wolverton Place, which had an existing home, and the other parcel is still vacant and is addressed 4750. The lot addressed 4750 is the subject of this application. In April of 2013, in conjunction with the recording of this 2012-approved subdivision, the City received a Permanent Tree Stand and Native Grassland Preservation and Conservation Easement. This easement was recommended by the applicant’s environmental consultant as a result of the Conservation Design process, agreed to by the applicant at the time of subdivision, and accepted by the City in good faith. This easement was subsequently recorded over the 10 –plus acre parcel prior to the recording of the subdivision. The grassland south portion of the easement exists over most of the current property at 4750 Wolverton Place. It consists primarily of grass and appears as a yard area. There is no specific, active public use of the property burdened by the grassland south easement area. Rather, its value to the public is as a runoff filtration and absorption area, such that the reduced volume of runoff water leaving the site is of a higher quality than if it ran off a maintained lawn area. In addition, the easement contains a variety of restrictions attempting to preserve the environmental and visual values of the site. In April of 2014, the new owners of the new easterly lot, 4550 Wolverton Place, questioned the purpose and viability of the easement, but more specifically claimed they had not been provided proper notification of the easement’s existence when they closed on the property. In order to avoid threatened litigation, the City Council ultimately granted a vacation of the portion of the easement over 4550 Wolverton Place. The applicant is now requesting similar consideration of an easement vacation for the property at 4750. As outlined in Staff’s memo, it is noted that the applicant received a monetary benefit as a result of the initial granting of the conservation easement with the subdivision. It is the opinion of Staff that it would Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 Approval of Planning Commission Minutes 06/16/14 [Page 14 of 18] MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, June 16, 2014 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 15 of 18 be appropriate for the applicant to pay back a portion of the credit if the easement is vacated, as the legal basis leading to the vacation enacted in April of 2014 is not applicable to 4750. The Planning Commission should open the public hearing and consider comments from the public and the applicant. If the Planning Commission concludes that there is public value in retaining the conservation easement, then a recommendation for denial of the vacation request would be in order. If the Planning Commission finds that there is no public value in retaining the easement, then a recommendation for vacation approval would be in order. Revis Stephenson, 1850 Fox Ridge Road, stated he is the owner of the property and that he was here when the City Council approved the vacation of the easement for the other piece of property. Stephenson stated while it was mentioned previously that there was threatened litigation, which was the reason for the City to review the easement, from that point forward there was no mention that it was due to threatened litigation but a pretty convincing presentation was given that the easement did not have any public purpose. In addition, the resolution says it is in the best interests of the City to vacate the easement. Stephenson indicated he was at the meeting when the other portion of the easement was vacated and that he was in agreement with the vacation but that he questioned why the City would only vacate half the easement if it is in the best interests of the City. Stephenson stated he was told at that time that the City could not amend the easement since notification was not sent out for my property. Stephenson stated he would like to call the Planning Commission’s attention to the resolution where it says that it is primarily grass, appears to be yard, and is surrounded by a private fence. There is no public use of the property by the grassland south area due to the nature and viability of the grassland south area, including its utility for the citizens of Orono. Staff finds that there is limited to no public interest in maintaining the grassland south portion of the conservation easement. The resolution goes on to say: whereas, the conservation easement identifies an area referred to as grassland south. The portion of the grassland south affecting the subject property is no longer needed for public purpose. The resolution further says: whereas, following the hearing and consideration of the proposed vacation, the Council has determined that it is in the public interest to vacate the Conservation Easement as it affects the subject property. Stephenson stated he is in agreement with the resolution and that he has spoken with Staff about vacating his portion of the easement. Stephenson stated the easement probably should have never been put on the property in the first place. Chair Leskinen opened the public hearing at 8:07 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Chair Leskinen closed the public hearing at 8:07 p.m. Leskinen asked if the original purpose of the easement was for drainage or water filtration. Curtis indicated it offered a stormwater quality benefit as well as protection of the viewshed based on the Conservation Design Analysis. Based on that information, the proposed easement areas were outlined. Curtis stated the overhead shows the grassland easement but noted there are also some other drainage easements and a tree preservation easement on the north part of the property which are not to be vacated. Leskinen asked if the area cannot be disturbed if the easement remains in place. Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 Approval of Planning Commission Minutes 06/16/14 [Page 15 of 18] MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, June 16, 2014 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 16 of 18 Curtis indicated that is correct. Stephenson stated the remaining part of the grassland easement is also inconsistent since that’s where the proposed septic systems are located. Stephenson stated it does not make sense that that is where the grassland easement is and it is inconsistent with other prior approved agreements with the City as it relates to the septic.Stephenson indicated the property provides lots of water filtration outside of this area and that there is a culvert that also catches the runoff. Leskinen asked if he owned the property at the time the easement was granted. Stephenson stated he owned the property at the time it was granted. Leskinen asked if he was aware of the easement at that time. Stephenson stated he was slightly aware of it because he was given notice but was not involved in the process. Thiesse asked what can change if the easement is vacated. Thiesse asked if they can subdivide the property any further. Curtis indicated they cannot. Thiesse stated to his recollection there is supposed to be a driveway someday going up the hill. Curtis indicated it is a five acre zone with a 100-foot front and rear setback. Thiesse noted they would not be allowed to construct an accessory structure in their front yard, so the view should not change. Curtis stated the area could become lawn or landscaped in some way. Leskinen asked if the landscaping would diminish its ability to filter the runoff. Curtis stated it potentially could and that a structure would not be allowed in that area without variances. Leskinen stated she is attempting to think what the worst case scenario would be if the easement is vacated. Landgraver noted the easement on the other property was vacated. Thiesse stated one of the arguments by the owner during the first vacation was that there is a substantial amount of wetland in that area. Leskinen asked if the wetland would increase or decrease the need for the easement. Thiesse stated in his opinion it would decrease it. Thiesse asked if the property to the east is also involved in the easement. Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 Approval of Planning Commission Minutes 06/16/14 [Page 16 of 18] MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, June 16, 2014 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 17 of 18 Curtis indicated that property is not part of it and that there is no conservation easement on that property. Landgraver stated the two larger properties do not have a similar easement. Leskinen stated if the easement on the adjoining property, which is also part of the subdivision, was vacated, it seems like a moot point. Leskinen stated the worst case scenario appears that there could be a slight decrease in filtration. Landgraver stated the map shows the property on the left has this easement that the City is being asked to vacate but the other two properties do not. Landgraver noted there also is not anyone from the public opposing the vacation. Lemke moved, Schoenzeit seconded, to recommend approval of Application No. 14-3674, Lori Gherardi on behalf of Wolverton Place, LLC, 4570 Wolverton Place, granting a vacation of the grassland south portion of the conservation easement. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS 6. REPORT FROM PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES ON CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS HELD ON MAY 27, 2014, AND JUNE 9, 2014. Lemke stated he attended the May 27 City Council meeting and that a dedication plaque honoring Chief Joseph Orono was given to the City by the Sons of the American Revolution. Police Chief Farniok spoke about the Police Explorer Program and the awards that were won. Nick Anhut of Ehlers & Associates addressed the City Council about the sale of the General Obligation Bonds and the City’s AAA rating. The City Council voted to authorize the sale of $5,380,000 in General Obligation Bonds. Representatives from Clifton, Larson presented the City’s financial audit, with no significant concerns being raised. Chief Van Eyll from the Long Lake Fire Department presented his annual report to the Council, with Van Eyll reporting that the emergency response times in 2013 were decreased for Orono. Under the Planning Department items, the City Council approved the joint use dock license for Pirates Cove and approved the feasibility study for Watertown Road and Stubbs Bay Road. It was noted that the Mayor and Council Member Levang attended a Nonpoint Education for Municipal Officials workshop. The City Administrator discussed the possible creation of a Lake Minnetonka Scenic Byway. It was felt that there would be minimal benefit to Orono and the Council directed Staff to draft a letter talking about Orono’s historic commitment for preservation of scenic pathway and requesting that Orono be kept updated on developments. Lemke reported Orono’s Public Works Director/City Engineer has resigned and a replacement will be recruited. In addition, Andrew Mack was hired as the new Community Development Director starting in mid June. Leskinen stated she attended the June 9 meeting and there was an update by the Mayor of Mound regarding the success of the police contract with Orono. There was also a presentation on the Tour de Tonka scheduled for August 2. The representative to the LMCD, Andrew McDermott, reported that the water level on Lake Minnetonka has never been this high and that as a result the LMCD approved an Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 Approval of Planning Commission Minutes 06/16/14 [Page 17 of 18] MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, June 16, 2014 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 18 of 18 emergency high water level ordinance creating a no wake zone over the entire lake during times of extraordinary high water. Leskinen stated the majority of the Planning Department items were placed on the Consent Agenda with the exception of the application with the underground garage. Leskinen stated the City Council had a similar discussion to that held by the Planning Commission and the application was eventually approved. The other item not on the Consent Agenda was the application requesting the addition of a second story and the stability of the foundation. The City Council did approve the application subject to certification of the foundation being provided by a professional engineer. Leskinen indicated the sketch plan for the property behind the Lund’s property was also discussed, with the Council indicating they would prefer access to the site come off of County Road 19. 7. OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION Curtis stated a slope failure was reported to Staff last week but that the contractor did not leave an address. Curtis indicated she has attempted to reach the contractor but has not had any success. A meeting on the site will be scheduled once contact is made to review the situation. McGrann asked if any of the business owners on Lake Minnetonka have complained about the no-wake ordinance. Gaffron indicated the City has not received any complaints so far. ADJOURNMENT Leskinen moved, Schoenzeit seconded, to adjourn the Orono Planning Commission meeting at 8:41 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. ATTEST ____________________________________ Denise Leskinen, Chair Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 Approval of Planning Commission Minutes 06/16/14 [Page 18 of 18] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #02 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #13-3645 [Total Pages 32] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3655 [Total Pages 38] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #04 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3675 [Total Pages 59] Item #05 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3676 [Total Pages 25] Item #05 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3676 [Total Pages 25] Item #05 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3676 [Total Pages 25] Item #05 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3676 [Total Pages 25] Item #05 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3676 [Total Pages 25] Item #05 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3676 [Total Pages 25] Item #05 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3676 [Total Pages 25] Item #05 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3676 [Total Pages 25] Item #05 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3676 [Total Pages 25] Item #05 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3676 [Total Pages 25] Item #05 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3676 [Total Pages 25] Item #05 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3676 [Total Pages 25] Item #05 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3676 [Total Pages 25] Item #05 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3676 [Total Pages 25] Item #05 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3676 [Total Pages 25] Item #05 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3676 [Total Pages 25] Item #05 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3676 [Total Pages 25] Item #05 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3676 [Total Pages 25] Item #05 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3676 [Total Pages 25] Item #05 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3676 [Total Pages 25] Item #05 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3676 [Total Pages 25] Item #05 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3676 [Total Pages 25] Item #05 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3676 [Total Pages 25] Item #05 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3676 [Total Pages 25] Item #05 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File #14-3676 [Total Pages 25] Item #06 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File 14-3677 [Total Pages 06] Item #06 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File 14-3677 [Total Pages 06] Item #06 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File 14-3677 [Total Pages 06] Item #06 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File 14-3677 [Total Pages 06] Item #06 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File 14-3677 [Total Pages 06] Item #06 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File 14-3677 [Total Pages 06] Item #06 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File 14-3677 [Total Pages 06] Item #06 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File 14-3677 [Total Pages 06] Item #06 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File 14-3677 [Total Pages 06] Item #06 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File 14-3677 [Total Pages 06] Item #06 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 File 14-3677 [Total Pages 06]