The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About10/15/2012 Planning Commission MinutesMINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 15, 2012 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 ROLL CALL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Chair Loren Schoenzeit, Commissioners Lizz Levang, Denny Walsh, Bruce Lemke, Denise Leskinen, Kevin Landgraver, and John Thiesse. Representing Staff were Assistant City Administrator for Long- Term Strategic Planning Mike Gaffron, Planning Coordinator Melanie Curtis, and Recorder Jackie Young. City Council Member Doug Franchot was present. Chair Schoenzeit called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. CONSENT AGENDA Item No. 3 was placed on the Consent Agenda. *1. APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 17, 2012 Levang moved, Walsh seconded, to approve the minutes of the Orono Planning Commission meeting of September 17, 2012, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. NEW BUSINESS 2. 312-3576 JOHN AND SHERRY GORMAN, 3585 FREDERICK STREET, VARIANCE, 6:32 P.M. – 6:52 P.M. John Gorman, Applicant, and Eric Olson, Builder, were present. Curtis noted this application was before the Planning Commission at the September meeting. At that time the applicants were proposing to construct a 3-stall garage addition and porch to their existing home and were requesting a hardcover variance to allow 46.9 percent hardcover within the 75-250 foot zone where 48.2 percent currently exists. Since that time the City Council has adopted revised hardcover regulations placing this lot in Tier 1 of the Stormwater Quality Overlay District where up to 25 percent of the lot’s total area is permitted to be hardcover. For the applicants’ property, the Tier 1 assignment allows them 5,296 square feet. Their previous proposal resulted in 7,350 square feet or 34 percent of the total lot area. The Planning Commission directed the applicants to reassess their project and come back to the October meeting with additional hardcover reductions. The applicants have re-evaluated their property and have found additional hardcover reductions resulting in a slightly reduced total proposed hardcover level of 6,740 square feet or 31.8 percent. The applicants are proposing to remove 1,189 square feet of hardcover. However, the proposed hardcover levels still exceed the new, code allowed 25 percent by 1,444 square feet. Issues for discussion: 1. Does the Planning Commission find that the owners propose to use the subject property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 15, 2012 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 2 2. How does the Planning Commission find that the variances, if granted, will affect the essential character of the neighborhood? 3. If the Commission recommends approval of the requested variances, is it appropriate to impose conditions in order to mitigate the impacts created by the granting of the requested variances? 4. Although they are not meeting the code requirement for 25 percent, does the Planning Commission find the applicants have provided hardcover removals which are substantial enough to offset the proposed additions to the home? 5. Are the hardcover levels supported by practical difficulties? Is there room to reduce other areas of hardcover on the property without reducing functionality or creating additional practical difficulties? The applicants have better defined their proposed areas for hardcover reductions and the changes result in 601 square feet less than their previous request. The property currently contains a home with an attached garage. Staff does not find a practical difficulty supporting the requested overages in hardcover. Further, the applicants have not demonstrated that enforcing the hardcover provisions of the Zoning Ordinance will deprive the applicants of the reasonable use of their property. For these reasons, Staff recommends denial of the hardcover variance. Eric Olson, Builder, stated due to the current situation with the existing small garage, the applicants are proposing to construct a new three-stall garage on the property. They have reduced the hardcover by another 600 square feet. The new garage is required for additional storage of items used on the lake and would improve the neighborhood. There are currently two homes located on the east and west end that are large homes. The proposal would also increase the living space and function of the existing house. Lemke asked if the entire house is going to be remodeled. Olson indicated the area by the garage would be remodeled. Olson noted the first set of plans submitted shows elevations of the current structure. Curtis noted the color version of the plan is to help depict the hardcover areas that are proposed to be removed. Olson noted that the lot narrows down by the lake, which reduces the lot area and makes it difficult to meet the 25 percent hardcover limit. Olson indicated they have eliminated as much hardcover as possible. Removal of the boulders would only result in a small hardcover reduction. Schoenzeit asked what the size of the current garage is and what the function of the new living space will be. Olson stated to his recollection, the current garage is 22’ x 21’. There would be a small area with a staircase going up to the living space. The small area would serve as a mechanical room/laundry area. Currently the master bedroom is on one level and the master bathroom is on another level, which would be changed under the proposal to be on the same level. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 15, 2012 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 3 Olson stated due to living on the lake, the applicants require additional storage space. The small two-car garage does not allow them any storage and the new garage would make the lot more attractive and user friendly. Levang asked if the hot tub is located on the property line. Curtis indicated it appears to be located on the property line. Chair Schoenzeit opened the public hearing at 6:42 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Chair Schoenzeit closed the public hearing at 6:42 p.m. Leskinen commented that there is quite a bit of hardcover on this lot. Schoenzeit stated this property is significantly beyond what is normally allowed and that the Planning Commission has to take the recommendation of Staff into consideration on this application. Walsh stated the purpose of the new hardcover ordinance was to reduce the number of variances being granted. Historically in Orono people are allowed two-car garages and that the applicants have the option to remodel the house if they would like to upgrade the appearance. Walsh stated the lot already has a lot of hardcover given the pool and hot tub, and that in his view going from 47 percent down to 30 percent is not the answer. Levang stated in her view the driveway could possibly be reduced somewhat. Leskinen commented a bump out would probably still be required to allow the driveway to be functional. Thiesse stated part of the Planning Commission’s job is to protect the environment and reduce hardcover, which the applicants are doing. If the garage is built, it will be close to the house next door. Thiesse noted the house next door does not have a pool, which accounts for a substantial amount of hardcover. The applicant is reducing hardcover and the variance process is still available for those properties that do not fit. Thiesse stated in his view this application is asking for too much. Schoenzeit stated they could look at a better functioning two-car garage, but based on the current guidelines, the applicants need to demonstrate a practical difficulty. Schoenzeit stated the level of hardcover being requested is beyond what he would be comfortable approving and that he would encourage the applicants to reduce the amount of hardcover on the lot. Landgraver noted due to the configuration of the lot, the new hardcover ordinance did not benefit the property owners much, but that he still would not be comfortable granting a variance for this amount of hardcover. Olson noted the current building envelope is already over existing hardcover and the net addition of hardcover is 186 square feet over what is currently there. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 15, 2012 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 4 Schoenzeit stated less hardcover is better but that the excess is way beyond the 25 percent allowed. The new hardcover would increase it even further and it would be difficult to justify allowing it. Leskinen stated the difficulty is the amount of hardcover being asked and the fact that a practical difficulty has not been demonstrated. Leskinen commented it would be nice to have additional storage space but that it does not rise to the level of a practical difficulty. Walsh stated the value of the lot is having a larger house than what would be allowed under today’s regulations. Levang asked whether the applicant would be willing to reduce it to a two-car garage. Mr. Gorman stated they would not be gaining anything if they reduced it to a two-car garage. Walsh moved, Lemke seconded, to recommend denial of Application #12-3576 John and Sherry Gorman, 3585 Frederick Street. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. *3. #12-3578 DENNIS AND DEBORAH KRUMP, 25 STUBBS BAY ROAD NORTH, VARIANCE Levang moved, Walsh seconded, to recommend approval of Application #12-3578, Dennis and Deborah Krump, 25 Stubbs Bay Road North, granting of a side setback variance. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. 4. #12-3579 JOHN LEIN, 2700 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH, PRELIMINARY PLAT, 6:53 P.M. – 6:50 P.M. – 7:55 P.M. John Lein, Applicant; and Mark Gronberg, Surveyor, were present. Curtis noted this application was before the Planning Commission at its July meeting as a sketch plan review. Curtis stated the applicant is requesting preliminary plat approval to create four new, 2-plus acre buildable lots and a private road from the original 15-plus acres. Lot 1 is proposed to contain 4.62 acres total; 2.45 acres dry, buildable. Lot 2 is proposed to contain 5.82 acres total; 2.27 acres dry, buildable. Lot 3 contains the existing house and is proposed to contain 2.6 acres dry, buildable. Lot 4 is proposed to contain 2.02 acres dry, buildable. All of the lots would be served by a new, private road with a cul-de-sac extending northerly from Sixth Avenue North. All lots would be served by private septic systems and private wells. The proposed subdivision is in conformity with the City’s Comprehensive Plan guiding for this area for single-family rural residential at a maximum density of one unit per two acres. Each proposed lot meets the minimum requirement of two acres dry, buildable land. There is a 5-plus acre Manage One wetland MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 15, 2012 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 5 and establishment of 35-foot wetland buffers and buffer setbacks will be triggered for lots containing wetlands. The original home and a bridge over the drainage creek exists on Lot 3. There is also a barn on Lot 4 that is proposed to be removed. The existing driveway will be abandoned and an outlot will be platted west of the driveway which will serve as the private road/cul-de-sac. A stormwater pond is proposed to be created straddling Lot 1 and Lot 2 to address new stormwater from the new hardcover. The property has an area of existing woods along County Road 6 and the eastern property line. In addition, there is a large wetland with an open view shed over the wetlands from County Road 6. A Conservation Design report has been submitted by the applicant, which indicates the trees along the creek, the north property line, and County Road 6 should be preserved. The applicant should provide conservation easements for protection of the trees for the road noise, sound buffering, screening, and erosion protection purposes. An access permit is required from Hennepin County in order to relocate the property access and create a new private road. The City will require standard perimeter, drainage, and utility easements around all property boundaries as well as Conservation and Flowage easements over the delineated wetlands and wetland buffers. Tree conservation easements should be provided to protect the trees. At the sketch plan review, the Planning Commission recommended the applicant dedicate a trail easement along the north side of County Road 6 as part of the plat. The plat is subject to the standard park fee and stormwater drainage trunk fee. The property is not located within the MUSA and the lots are proposed to be served by septic systems and private wells. Septic system designs have been submitted to the City and have by approved by the septic inspector. The developer has prepared a Conservation Design report that identifies areas where trees and positive views should be preserved. The plan also outlines invasive, nonnative species to be removed. The report indicates the developer should either preserve the existing pine stand along the old driveway or remove the trees and establish an area of turf. Staff would propose a different option, which would be a modification of option one and create less disturbance. Staff would suggest the developer preserve the existing pine trees, leave most of the wheel strip driveway as is but remove the driveway curb cut at County Road 6 and restore the ditch area. This option would make the wheel strip driveway “invisible” from County Road 6 and preserve the stand of trees. The developer could do a similar treatment to the north end of the driveway where Lots 3 and 4 meet. Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat to create four buildable lots. The City Engineer has reviewed the preliminary plat application materials and his comments have been included in the packet. The developer should prepare a final plat application that responds to and incorporates the recommendations of the City Engineer. Schoenzeit requested the photos of the site be displayed on the overhead. Landgraver asked whether Staff’s recommendations include the review conducted by Bolton & Menk. Curtis stated the City Engineer’s recommendations are essentially standards that the development needs to be held to and address drainage calculations, road design, easements and conservation design requirements. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 15, 2012 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 6 Landgraver commented Items 11 and 12 seem fairly meaningful recommendations. Curtis stated the existing barn would need to be removed as part of the proposal because they cannot construct a road without removal of the barn. Gronberg stated the barn has already been removed. Curtis stated the rest of the City Engineer’s recommendations would need to be met by the time of final plat. Curtis indicated the final plat application would need to incorporate all of the recommendations of the City Engineer. Thiesse asked whether the conservation easement would cover some of the trees. Curtis indicated it would. Thiesse asked who would manage the conservation easement. Curtis stated typically it is addressed in the homeowner’s association documents. Gaffron stated the City has a standard conservation easement document that covers foliage, which has been amended in the past to include such things as tree preservation and upland buffers. Typically this is an easement granted to the City and the City has the right to prohibit certain activities. It would also give the City the right to review and approve changes that would be proposed for that site. Gaffron noted the easements would be filed with the title. Landgraver stated the primary change he sees from the sketch plan is the stormwater pond and asked whether that is the only major change. Curtis stated to her belief that is the major change but that the applicant could address that question in more detail. Lemke asked if the house locations could change slightly after preliminary plat approval. Curtis stated they can, and that Staff asks for potential locations of septic and house. Curtis indicated without that, there could be instances where a plat is approved and you could be left with a lot that does not have a buildable area. Typically the grading is also incorporated into the final plat. Lemke asked whether the road would be a private road or a public road. Curtis indicated it would be a private road. Levang noted Page 3 of Staff’s report states there will be a 50-foot private road corridor with a 100-foot cul-de-sac but then later it says the standard paved width of the road would be 24 feet with a 50-foot cul- de-sac. Gaffron indicated it is typically 40 feet. Curtis stated the outlot would be 50 feet wide and the paved width of the road would be 24 feet. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 15, 2012 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 7 Walsh asked if there are any plans for the bridge. John Lein, Applicant, stated the bridge belongs to Lot 3 and that it would be sold with the property. Lein stated as it relates to the trail on the north side of County Road 6, it would be redundant to require a trail on that side since there is a trail on the south side of County Road 6 and that he would ask that the trail requirement be waived. As it relates to the holding pond, Lein indicated it does not provide a good view and that they are attempting to provide good views for all of the lots. There is a wetland that provides drainage and would be more than adequate. Lein requested the Planning Commission waive the requirement for the holding pond. Lein stated in regards to the fees being charged, he would also like to have those reduced. The property consists of 15 acres and there will only be four lots. Lein noted the economy is currently in a recession and there is a reduced demand for housing. Orono’s fees are based on a better housing market and that he would like those fees reduced by $20,000. Lein stated he would like the Planning Commission to make a recommendation to the City Council on that matter. Schoenzeit asked if there is anything specific about the use of this property that would make it different from other developments in the City and should be given a special fee. Schoenzeit asked if it would be a nonprofit entity that would be purchasing the property. Lein commented he hopes it will not be nonprofit because due to his age, he needs to sell them quickly and slightly under the market price. Lein indicated he cannot wait for the housing market to pick up before he sells the lots and that he would like to have some money right now. Chair Schoenzeit opened the public hearing at 7:11 p.m. Russell Berman, 2595 Kelly Road, Medina, stated the prospect of looking at a septic system is not something he likes after substantially improving his property. Berman acknowledged he does pay taxes to another jurisdiction but that his property does abut this land and that he would be looking at two septic sites at the back end of his property. Berman indicated he has resided on his property for four and a half years and the subject property has not been maintained during that time. Chair Schoenzeit closed the public hearing at 7:13 p.m. Schoenzeit asked whether there are any setbacks or screening that would be required for the septic tanks. Curtis noted the septic tank would be in the ground and that she is not sure what type of septic system is currently on Lot 3. There is a setback to the property line and the applicant meets that setback. Curtis stated she does not have the septic designs with her tonight. Gronberg stated he does not know where the existing septic site is located but that the two sites that have been tested are beyond the setback requirement. Gaffron stated the septic sites need to be 20 feet from the property line. Gaffron stated typically the only thing that is visible is a berm that is grassed over, which may have a white pipe sticking out. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 15, 2012 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 8 Schoenzeit asked if that is compatible with Medina’s setbacks for septic systems. Gaffron indicated Staff has not looked at Medina’s setback requirements. Berman indicated they have city sewer and water. Lemke asked if the City requires the stormwater pond. Gaffron stated both the City and the Watershed District require the stormwater pond. Schoenzeit stated one of the requirements is that the property handles its own runoff. Gaffron stated the developer has the option of creating a different shaped holding pond. Gronberg stated since the pond needs to be at a certain depth, it is difficult to achieve that if the shape is changed. Gronberg noted the holding pond cannot be located in the wetland and that some of the wetlands on the property are marginal. Walsh asked whether the trail is being duplicated. Curtis indicated Staff is looking at the opportunity to secure the trail easement for the future and that they do not know what the plan will be for a trail on this property. There is definitely a trail on the north side. Schoenzeit stated as a good neighbor, while the developer is looking to split the lots up, it is a reasonable request to be made and that the City should make that request. Curtis noted the City would not require a trail to be constructed but that they are requesting the trail easement. Schoenzeit commented it is good City planning to obtain an easement. Levang asked if the Planning Commission can make a recommendation on the fees. Curtis indicated the Planning Commission can make a recommendation on the fees if they would like but that the City Council would need to approve a waiver. Schoenzeit stated he does not see a compelling reason why this property is any different from other developments within the City and that the City utilizes that money to make improvements. Schoenzeit stated Mr. Lein can request a decrease in the fees from the City Council. Leskinen asked as it relates to the finished grading, whether Staff is fine with what is being proposed. Curtis stated the difference with this plan versus the Grand Hill application is that Grand Hill depicted lots and house locations but they did not finalize a grading plan with the developer. This preliminary plat shows the grading that is required along the common lot lines to address the storm water and the house locations to the lot line. Curtis stated essentially the grading plan that they are proposing is the one they are requesting be approved. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 15, 2012 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 9 Leskinen asked whether the grading plan has been deemed adequate. Curtis stated that is one of the things the City Engineer will review and approve. The City Engineer has recommended that some of the trees near the creek bed be preserved. Schoenzeit asked if there are any other septic locations available on the property that abuts Mr. Berman’s property. Gronberg indicated he spoke with the City’s septic inspector when he did the septic testing, and on Lot 2, the house is located slightly to the south to reduce the length of the driveway. There are currently two septic sites on that lot and the primary one would be located approximately 40 feet back from the property line. On Lot 3, there is the existing house and a ravine to the east. Gronberg stated perhaps the septic sites could be moved 10 to 15 feet, but noted those are the flat areas and the best locations for the septic sites. There would be a conservation easement along the north property line and they can look at that to see whether they can preserve any trees in that area to help screen the septic area. Lemke asked if the primary septic site would be A or B. Gronberg indicated it could be either one. It is possible that the existing house on Lot 3 could be torn down at some point in the future and that they would envision they will construct a house a little closer to the bridge. Gronberg indicated there is a pretty natural slope for a walkout. Lemke asked if there is currently a septic system on Lot 3. Lein indicated there is and that it is in the area depicted as septic site A. Gaffron asked if there is an expectation that the existing house will be removed. Lein indicated he is going to sell the property as is and that he is not sure what the new property owners will do. Berman noted there are already utility easements and that the utility company consistently takes trees down. Berman stated the concept that the house will be hidden by trees or a path is disingenuous. Levang asked if he can see the house currently. Berman indicated he cannot but that will change under this proposal. Curtis noted the City would be requiring a conservation easement to preserve those trees. Curtis illustrated the property lines on the drawing. Berman pointed out his lot on the overhead. Gaffron stated to his understanding that is not his lot and that it would be to the right of the pie shaped lot. Thiesse requested Staff point out the existing tree line. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 15, 2012 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 10 Curtis pointed out the end of the roadway and noted that it coincides with the right-of-way where the road would be developed. Berman stated his understanding of the drawings is that it Lein concurred that preserving trees is a good idea. Lein asked how many trees would need to be removed as it relates to the trail on the north side of County Road 6. Schoenzeit stated the City is merely requesting an easement for future use and that they are not requiring a trail be built at this time. Lein stated requiring a trail on the north side, in addition to the trail on the south side, would be redundant. Curtis illustrated the location of the trail on the north side of County Road 6. Schoenzeit commented it could enhance the value o the property if there is a trail access nearby. Lein stated he does not agree that it would enhance the property value and that typically property owners consider it a detriment. Chair Schoenzeit reopened the public hearing at 7:28 p.m. Tom Carroll, 2600 County Road 6, indicated he is the neighbor to the east. Carroll stated he has been listening to the conversation tonight and that he does not believe there is any reason to have a holding pond. There is plenty of wetland area that is marginal right now. The additional runoff would take a marginal wetland and possibly make it productive. Carroll stated in his view a holding pond would hurt the environment. Number two, as it relates to the trail, there is already a trail to the south. If you go west, there is a trail that leads right into Baker Park. Anybody that wants to use a trail has miles and miles of trails available. Third, when the Medina development went in to the north of this property, the residents in Orono adjacent to it did not oppose it. Carroll stated they perhaps should have opposed it because since that development went in, there have been snowmobiles trespassing on his property and vandalism to the trees. Carroll indicated he has had to call the police and that there have been people shooting firearms in his woods. Carroll stated in his view he does not feel anybody to the north has anything to say about what goes on in Orono. Levang asked how he feels about the proposal. Carroll stated he is in favor of the proposal and that he is in agreement that as many trees as possible should be protected. Some of the trees are experiencing pine rot and have to be cut down. Carroll stated to require a holding pond would be a detriment and that he would like to see more water diverted into the wetlands. There is currently mostly muck in that area and wildlife no longer habitats there. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 15, 2012 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 11 Connie Lein indicated she has resided on this property for over 30 years and that they have planted a number of trees on their property over the years. If the City is worried about removal of trees, that will not happen. Connie Lein indicated she is in agreement with Mr. Carroll regarding the holding pond. Over the years they have been able to mow closer and closer due to the lack of water in that area. Lein stated in her view the sight is fantastic and that there are deer and geese in the area. A holding pond would ruin the view and it is not necessary. There is also a ditch that runs the whole distance of the property and varies from one foot to five feet deep. There is very little, if any, water in the creek currently because of the holding pond that was constructed behind this property. The creek used to have about three feet of water in it but now there is no water in it due to the holding pond. Chair Schoenzeit closed the public hearing at 7:35 p.m. John Lein stated the holding pond would be an eyesore. Lein pointed out in the documents there are statements regarding views and that he objects to someone going out and evaluating views. There is one view that was negative where you could place a pond, which is where the electric lines run parallel next to County Road 6. Lein stated he is in agreement that those are eyesores, and if there is anything the Planning Commission can do about them, he would appreciate it. Schoenzeit asked whether the holding pond is required. Gaffron stated because this development would add additional hard surface to the site, the Watershed District and the City would consider a holding pond necessary. A holding pond does not necessarily have to rectangular although there are some parameters that have to be met. Typically after a number of years a holding pond becomes a more natural looking area. Gaffron stated if the City would call it a wildlife pond, it would likely be perceived as something more positive. Gaffron noted the City does not have the ability to say it does not need to be there. Thiesse stated the Planning Commission is not the body that would recommend a holding pond is not necessary. Walsh noted the area lakes are also low given the lack of rain. Walsh commented everybody likes wildlife and that it is great to have those views. Connie Lein asked if the holding pond could be located further west. Gronberg pointed out that area is a wetland and they are not allowed to construct holding ponds in that area. Lein noted the Minnehaha Creek area from Gray’s Bay dam to Minnehaha Falls is all manmade and not natural. Lake of the Isles, Lake Calhoun, Lake Harriett and the creek was not the way it is today and was originally wetland. Lein stated there is nobody that would say it should go back to what it was but that history tells us that these wetlands eventually get developed whenever land becomes valuable enough. Schoenzeit stated after looking at Staff’s recommendations, the main issue outstanding is the trail easement. Schoenzeit stated use of trails has increased over the years and provides a safe area for people MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 15, 2012 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 12 to walk. For the safety of the people, the City has to continue to make that request. As the City sees with other trails, the usage is growing and they are a nice amenity. Landgraver noted Staff recommended a modified Option 1. Landgraver asked if there is an agreement to follow Staff’s recommendation for less site disturbance or whether the Planning Commission needs to discuss that further. Curtis stated the Planning Commission should discuss anything that is contrary to what the applicant’s plan is proposing Gronberg stated he likes the option proposed by Staff and that it would be less cost to Mr. Lein and would grow up natural over the years. Lein stated he would like to keep it as natural as possible. Landgraver asked what would happen with the bridge. Lein stated the bridge would go with the lot. Landgraver asked whether the Planning Commission needs to do anything further with that. Curtis stated at the time the final plat comes before the Planning Commission, the bridge could be addressed. Staff does not care if someone lives in the existing house after the lot is sold. Levang asked if Staff knows the status of the septic on the lot with the existing house. Curtis indicated Staff has reviewed the proposed sites and they are acceptable. Landgraver stated the wetlands and fees are beyond the scope of the Planning Commission. Landgraver indicated he is in agreement with the request for a trail easement simply because there is a trail connection possible. Gronberg asked if the trail easement is in conjunction with the standard drainage and utility easement. Gaffron stated typically drainage and utility easements are concurrent with the trail easement and that is Staff’s expectation in this case. Gronberg asked whether Hennepin County would be commenting on this application. Curtis stated Hennepin County may still respond on this application. Gaffron stated Hennepin County does not have any need for that right-of-way at the present time and that the City would rather Hennepin County negotiate with the individual homeowners if they feel the need for that right-of-way. Schoenzeit asked if the applicant is acceptable with the concurrent easement and trail. Lein stated he is not in favor of the trail easement at all. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 15, 2012 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 13 Gronberg noted there are no plans currently to construct a trail. Lein stated he has to sell these lots and that a possible future trail is a detriment. Shoenzeit commented the house would be located quite a ways from any trail and that he would recommend the trail be concurrent with the utility easements. Levang moved, Walsh seconded, to recommend approval of Application #12-3579, John Lein, 2700 Sixth Avenue North, preliminary plat approval, subject to Staff and the City Engineer’s recommendations, with the recommendation that Option 3 be utilized for the conservation design, and to recommend a trail easement be granted. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS 5. REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES ATTENDING CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ON SEPTEMBER 24, 2012, AND OCTOBER 8, 2012 Schoenzeit stated at the September 24 City Council meeting a majority of the items were placed on the Consent Agenda. As it relates to the deputy chief position, a study shown that the pay rates were close to other similar sized cities. Levang stated there was also a concern raised by the City Council about what would happen to that position if the contract was not renewed. Schoenzeit asked what action the City Council took on the rooster matter. Gaffron stated the property owner who owns the roosters was charged with three counts of disturbing peace and quiet, which is a petty misdemeanor. The judge dismissed two counts and found her guilty on one count. There was a $300 fine and stayed $200 of it. There was also a condition placed on the property owner for one year stating that she cannot have same or similar violations. The lady has told the prosecuting attorney that she is probably going to be moving since the house is in foreclosure, so the problem may be resolved at some point. Gaffron stated the fine may not be enough to persuade someone to get rid of their roosters. If there are more violations or another conviction within a year, the fines get stiffer. At this point Staff is waiting to see if the situation changes. Leskinen reported on the October 8th City Council meeting, noting that two of the five planning applications were placed on the Consent Agenda. The application dealing with Willow Drive South was removed from the Consent Agenda to address the dedication of the private road to the City. The road would be built to city standards and the City voted to waive the dedication to the City. Leskinen stated the Gail Gustafson application, 1430 Cherry Place, was also removed from the Consent Agenda due to a question about a variance being required for a stairway in the 0-75 foot area. Following a brief discussion, the City Council approved the application. There was a lengthy discussion regarding the application for 4156 Highwood Road with regard to the deck encroaching on the fire lane. Curtis noted the City Council denied the encroachment of the deck. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 15, 2012 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 14 Leskinen indicated the applicants had agreed to reduce the size of the deck but were not agreeable to cutting it as much as the City Council wanted. Levang stated the applicants were also given the option to table the application but they turned it down because of their scheduled closing. Leskinen stated there was also a long discussion regarding security upgrades and a possible facility for the police department. 6. OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION None ADJOURNMENT Levang moved, Leskinen seconded, to adjourn the Orono Planning Commission meeting at 8:24 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. _________________________________ Loren Schoenzeit, Chair MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,October 15,2012 6:30 o'clock p.m. Leskinen indicated the applicants had agreed to reduce the size of the deck but were not agreeable to cutting it as much as the City Council wanted. Levang stated the applicants were also given the option to table the application but they turned it down because of their scheduled closing. Leskinen stated there was also a long discussion regarding security upgrades and a possible facility for the police department. 6. OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION None ADJOURNMENT Levang moved,Leskinen seconded,to adjourn the Orono Planning Commission meeting at 8:24 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0. 1 Loren Schoenzeit, Chair Page 14