Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-19-2017 Planning Commission Minutes MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,June 19,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. ROLL CALL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Chair John Thiesse, Commissioners Kevin Landgraver, Bruce Lemke, Chad Olson, Loren Schoenzeit, and Jon Schwingler. Representing Staff were Community Development Director Jeremy Barnhart, City Planner Melanie Curtis, City Planner Laura Oakden, and Recorder Jackie Young. Council Member Richard Crosby, II, was present. Chair Thiesse called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. NEW BUSINESS 1. Approval of Planning Commission Minutes of May 15,2017 Schoenzeit moved, Schwingler seconded,to approve the minutes of the Orono Planning Commission meeting of May 15,2017,as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. 2. 17-3942 CATHERINE SWEET,3405 AND 3407 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD,VACATION, 6:32 P.M.—6:55 P.M. Catherine Sweet,Applicant, was present. Barnhart stated the applicant is requesting to vacate the unimproved right-of-way between the properties at 3405 and 3407 Crystal Bay Road. The applicant owns the parcels on either side of the subject right-of- way and would like to sell 3407 Crystal Bay Road. Barnhart noted the DNR must be given 60 days to review this request and that Staff would ask that the public hearing be continued to the next City Council meeting on July 10th. The existing 20-foot right-of-way provides potential public access from the Dakota Trail to Lake Minnetonka and may also have uses for drainage and other purposes in the future. The subject right-of- way was provided to the City in exchange for the vacation of the right-of-way on the east side of 3405 Crystal Bay Road back in 1908. Typically in a right-of-way vacation, the property reverts back to the property that provided the right-of- way. In this situation, since the property at 3405 provided the right-of-way,that property would receive the vacated right-of-way. If both parcels receive half of the right-of-way, 3407 Crystal Bay Road would have lake frontage,which would likely allow for a dock. Staff does not support the vacation of the right-of-way since Lake Minnetonka is a valuable asset to the City of Orono. A vacation of this type that would limit the access is not in the best interest of the City. Further,the applicant has not demonstrated public interest in the property can be maintained. Thiesse asked if there are any other rights-of-way or easements in this area. Barnhart indicated there are some additional ones further to the east. Page 1 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,June 19,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Thiesse asked if Lot 19 can be divided if the easement is applied to that property. Barnhart stated in theory, if the right-of-way were vacated, it would go entirely to Lot 19, and that property owner could then choose to sell the entire right-of-way or a portion of it to the other property owner. Schoenzeit asked what percentage of fire lanes the City vacates and whether there is any history of doing this. Barnhart stated he does not have that information available tonight, but the most recent one he can think of occurred in 2015. Barnhart stated to his recollection the road did not touch the lake in that situation. In addition,the City has vacated unimproved rights-of-way, most recently in the Crestview neighborhood, but that road also did not touch the lake and was not similar to this situation. Thiesse asked if the land in front of Lot l would give access to the lake. Barnhart indicated that is actually city-owned property. Barnhart stated the City owns the four platted lots on the north side of Crystal Bay Road,which prevents the other four lots from having lake frontage. Landgraver asked what some of the general reasons are that the City would not vacate this type of right-of-way. Barnhart stated Staff does not know the potential future uses for this area and neighborhood and if any ability to access the lake is removed, it is difficult to get it back. Barnhart indicated the right-of-way also provides potential public access from the Dakota Trail to Lake Minnetonka and may also have uses for drainage. Landgraver asked how close the other right-of-way is located. Barnhart stated it is approximately half a mile away to the east and that the topography also gets steeper going that direction. Schoenzeit asked if this has the potential to be precedent setting. Barnhart indicated it might. Catherine Sweet,Applicant, 3405 Crystal Bay Road, stated the home at 3407 is currently empty. Sweet stated she understands the City's desire to protect the lake and allow for drainage. Sweet stated she would like to make an alternate proposal, which would be to do what the City did in 1908 and flip flop the easement. Sweet noted her driveway sits on the easement and that she had received permission from the City Council in 2004 to retain that. Sweet stated they could take that 20 feet of easement and put it on the other side of 3407. Sweet stated she would then tear down the garage, remove the existing driveway in that area, and then at some point tear down the small house and sell the property. Thiesse asked if she had presented that to Staff at all. Sweet indicated she suggested it this past Thursday when she received Staff's report. Page 2 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,June 19,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Barnhart stated the challenge with that is that adding a new easement or right-of-way introduces the potential that the neighbor might not necessarily be expecting an easement in that location. Barnhart stated he does not see a lot of value to the City in doing that, but that the Planning Commission is free to examine that alternate option more closely. Sweet noted 3407 does not have a dock but that there is a small stairway. The other three houses have docks and those have existed since at least 2004. Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 7:43 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Chair Thiesse continued the public hearing to the City Council meeting on July 10. Thiesse stated he would agree with Mr. Barnhart's statement and that it would be difficult to recommend approval on the alternative option since that was not noticed for a public hearing. Thiesse asked if the Planning Commission can discuss that option. Barnhart stated the Planning Commission could discuss it. Barnhart stated one option is to vacate it entirely and the other option is to vacate the right-of-way and then relocate it. Barnhart stated it appears to be in response to the City's concern about retaining lake access in this area. Landgraver stated it appears the City would still retain access to the lake and that it would be a responsive option by the applicant. Landgraver stated he would agree that the City should notify the neighbor. Thiesse asked if Ms. Sweet would have access to the garage if there was no access over the easement. Sweet stated she would not have access to either of her garages. Landgraver asked whether she intends to sell the lot if the right-of-way is relocated. Sweet stated at this point, if she does not get the easement, she will probably retain both pieces of property and hopefully sell them at some point in the future. If the right-of-way is moved to the other side,at some point the small house would be torn down and the property would become one continuous lot and any new owner would have use of the driveway. Thiesse asked if another application would be necessary to relocate the right-of-way if the Planning Commission denied the request tonight. Thiesse stated in his view the Planning Commission cannot act on that option without providing public notice. Schwingler commented the Planning Commission can only act on what is in front of them tonight. Barnhart stated that is true but that the Planning Commission could comment on the alternative option if they choose. Barnhart stated he does not believe another application requesting vacation and relocating it would be necessary. Schoenzeit stated he is not in favor of vacating the easement without a new and similar replacement. Thiesse and Landgraver stated they also are in agreement with that. Page 3 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,June 19,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Schoenzeit moved to recommend denial of Application No. 17-3942,Catherine Sweet,3405 and 3407 Crystal Bay Road,granting of a vacation,with the recommendation that the City Council consider approving relocation of the right-of-way in a similar size as the existing vacation in the manner proposed by the applicant during the June Planning Commission meeting. Landgraver asked what mechanism would be used to notify the neighbors of the possible relocation of the right-of-way. Schoenzeit stated the neighbors would have to be notified of the new option. Thiesse asked whether the applicant would need to start over with a new application. Barnhart stated the question is what would need to occur to acquire the new easement and that Staff would make sure the neighbor is notified. Schoenzeit noted the Planning Commission is not interested in the vacation as presented in the application. Barnhart stated it is not uncommon for an applicant to change their proposal following the Planning Commission meeting and before proceeding to the City Council. Barnhart stated he will verify what the exact process is prior to the application proceeding forward to the City Council. Thiesse noted the City Council could also direct that another public hearing be held at the next Planning Commission meeting. Landgraver seconded. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. 3. 17-3942 LORI ZAPPA,3670 TOGO ROAD,VARIANCES,6:55 P.M.—7:03 P.M. Lori Zappa,Applicant,was present. Curtis stated the applicant purchased the subject property last year and plans to construct a new 1-12 story home using the existing foundation plus a 12' x 12' porch on the rear. Variances to lot width, lot area, side yard and front yard setback are needed in order to build the new residence 4.2 feet from the west side lot line and 18.4 feet from the front lot line utilizing the existing home's foundation. The applicant's proposal involves reusing the existing foundation and much of the existing deck footprint for the new home. The new home will have a higher pitch to allow for the one-half story attic space and the sidewall height will remain eight feet as existing. The applicant is proposing to construct the 12' x 12' on the rear of the house, a portion of which will be constructed over existing deck footprint. The porch will match the proposed side setback of the home and will be a new encroachment 4.9 feet from the side lot line. A portion of the porch will be constructed over an approximate 5.5 foot portion of the existing deck footprint and then expanded another 6.5 feet to line up with the western edge of the home. A wetland setback for the proposed screen porch is required to permit the new screen porch on the rear to be set back 22 feet from the wetland where a 35-foot setback is required. Page 4 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,June 19,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Staff provided an analysis of the practical difficulty criteria and the Planning Commission should discuss the individual criteria contained in Staff's report. Staff finds that there are practical difficulties inherent to the lot area,width, presence of the wetlands and the existing improvements which support the granting of reasonable variances. Staff finds the requested variances to be reasonable and recommends approval. Landgraver asked if the garage will remain. Curtis indicated the garage will remain. Lori Zappa,Applicant, stated she purchased the property approximately a year ago and that she would like to create a better atmosphere both inside and outside of the home using the same foundation but increasing the height of the house. Zappa noted there is a large maple in the back yard that is leaning toward the neighbor's house which will be removed as part of this project. Thiesse asked if she will be using the same foundation or putting in a new foundation in the same location. Zappa indicated they will be using the same foundation and that they will make whatever repairs are necessary to the foundation. Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 7:00 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 7:00 p.m. Thiesse asked if she has spoken with the neighbors. Zappa stated the neighbor on the right is no longer there and the other neighbor on the left is in support of the project. Landgraver commented the request is reasonable. Landgraver moved,Olson seconded,to recommend approval of Application No. 17-3942,Lori Zappa,3670 Togo Road,granting of variances. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. 4. 17-3943 ALL ENERGY SOLAR ON BEHALF OF LARRY BARAN,480 STUBBS BAY ROAD NORTH,VARIANCE,7:03 P.M.—7:13 P.M. Larry Baran,Applicant, was present along with Kristin Sakwitz of All Energy Solar. Barnhart stated the applicant is requesting a variance from the ordinance that requires solar energy systems to be roof mounted. The property owner would like to place solar panels on the ground to the north of the existing house. The property is over two acres in size and is exempt from hardcover limitations. Page 5 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,June 19,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Staff has conducted a preliminary review of the project for compatibility with the septic system and has determined that the project is not likely to impact the existing or future septic sites. Based on Staffs review,the proposed location of the solar panels is within a heavily screened area of the yard and maintains setbacks from adjacent property lines. In addition,the solar panels will be screened from Stubbs Bay Road. Barnhart noted the notification area is 350 feet,with the nearest home being located 375 feet away. Typically solar panels are mounted to the south to obtain the maximum amount of sunlight. The roof in this case does not face the south. The array of solar panels would be 11 feet high at the back edge and 45 feet across. Barnhart noted there are some wetlands in the area but that the solar panels will not impact that area and the project will not require a wetland delineation. The array of solar panels would be located behind the front of the house and more than 50 feet from the right-of-way of Stubbs Bay Road. Barnhart displayed a picture of the property from Stubbs Bay Road and noted the area is very well screened. Staff is supportive of the request. Thiesse asked what the City's intent was to only allow roof mounted solar panels. Barnhart stated to his understanding the City Council wanted to limit hardcover. The goal of the City is to have solar panels integrated into the design of the property since retrofitting them on a house is not that easy. Landgraver asked whether the screening consists entirely of deciduous trees. Barnhart stated a big part of it was deciduous trees. Barnhart stated the screening from the foliage will likely go away during the winter but some screening will still remain with the tree trunks. Barnhart noted the City does not require screening that prevents someone from seeing something year-round but they attempt to mitigate it as much as practical. Lemke asked if it would make sense to take another look at the City's regulations to allow ground based solar panels. Barnhart stated that can be added to the list of ordinances to be reviewed. Larry Baran,Applicant, stated if the system is placed on the house,he would only be able to have a 3 kilowatt system, which would not be cost effective. The ground mounted system would be 8 kilowatts and cover his electrical use for the most part. Baran stated in 1986, his father placed solar panels on his building in Chicago for hot water. Baran stated the system worked fine but then the roof needed to be replaced and the panels had to be removed at a cost of$2,500. Kristin Sakwitz, All Energy Solar, stated part of the City's Comprehensive Land Use Plan states that the City wants its residents and property owners to use their private land and resources to promote alternative sources of energy, which this falls in line with. Page 6 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,June 19,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 7:12 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 7:12 p.m. Lemke and Thiesse stated the request makes sense. Lemke moved,Landgraver seconded,to recommend approval of Application No. 17-3943,All Energy Solar on behalf of Larry Baran,480 Stubbs Bay Road North,granting of a variance. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. 5. 17-3944 WESTWOOD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ON BEHALF OF UGORETS, 8098,LLC,2520 SHADYWOOD ROAD,ZONING CHANGE AND MASTER PLAN REVIEW, 7:13 P.M.—8:25 P.M. Tom Goodrum, Westwood Professional Services,and Alex Ugorets, Applicant, was present. Barnhart stated the applicant is requesting a zone change and a master concept plan approval to permit construction of a 40-unit condominium building on 3.11 acres to the south of the Freshwater Business center. In addition, the applicant is requesting the property be rezoned to RPUD. An RPUD allows some flexibility in land development and redevelopment and helps preserve desirable site characteristics and open space. The condominium building as proposed consists of four stories with a defined height of 48.8'. Site improvements include underground and surface parking. The property is currently zoned B-4 Office Professional but is guided in the Comprehensive Plan for mixed use with a prescribed density of 6-15 units per acre. The proposed use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed density is 15.63 units per acre, which is just above the guided upper threshold for density contained in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal provides 84 parking spaces,with 51 of those spaces being located under the building and 33 surface spaces. Given that ratio,the City's parking requirements are met. Proposed hardcover on the property is not an issue. The building is intended to be a 40-unit condominium building,which is different from what was presented at the sketch plan review. The applicant has indicated that condominium buildings require higher ceilings, which has increased the height of the building. At the time of the sketch plan review,the applicant was advised that the Planning Commission and City Council felt 30 feet was an appropriate maximum height. Currently the proposed height is 48.8', but the southern third of the building, closest to Shadywood Road, will be 36 feet in height since it does not include the penthouse. The defined height may change since Staff measures height from the existing grades to the top of the building. The applicant has prepared a traffic analysis which suggests the development will generate 232 trips per weekday; 18 trips in the morning peak hour and 21 trips in the evening peak hour. Overall,the development will increase traffic in the area about three percent. It should be noted that from a use standpoint,the proposed residential use will have a lower impact on the traffic compared to other possible Page 7 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,June 19,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. uses such as retail, an apartment building or a restaurant. Barnhart stated the majority of traffic in the Navarre area comes from the south. Other buildings in the area include the Freshwater Business Center, Culver's,Narrow's Bar and Saloon, and Shadywood Villas,which was approved last year. Access to this site is proposed off of a new shared driveway with the Freshwater Business Center. This driveway will line up with the driveway serving the church across Shadywood Road. Hennepin County supports the offset. The building is proposed to be 35 feet back from the Shadywood Road right-of-way line and about 35 feet from the new side lot line to the north. This has not been verified with an updated survey or site plan. The lot requires a 50-foot setback from the front yard and a 35-foot setback from the side yard. The building will also need to be 85 feet from the wetland. The applicant has provided some additional information regarding the residential properties located to the rear of the proposed building. Barnhart displayed a cross section of the building and noted that from the east side it will appear to be a 5-story building. The penthouse is set to the east of the building so it is not as close to the Shadywood side as it could be. Barnhart displayed a colored sketch of the exterior of the building and an aerial of the nearby residences. A number of comments regarding the project have been received. The applicant is also proposing to modify a portion of the shared property line between the proposed condominium lot and the lot containing the Freshwater Business Center. A boundary line adjustment is a minor administrative action but does impact lot size, setbacks, structural coverage, and density calculations. Staff has not reviewed the grading and drainage plan in detail but the plan depicts holding ponds. A Conservation Design plan will need to be completed. Staff is recommending tabling the application to allow for the submittal of certain information related to the rezoning request. The applicant is requesting that public comments be received and that the Planning Commission make a recommendation so the plan can proceed forward to the City Council. Thiesse asked if the hardcover will go beyond the 50 percent if it is rezoned to RPUD. Barnhart stated the proposed hardcover is at 36 percent and they would be allowed up to 50 percent. Any amount over 50 percent would require a variance as well as mitigation. Thiesse asked if the City is protecting the neighborhood by allowing condominiums rather than any other use on this site. Barnhart stated the applicant has changed his proposal from an apartment building to condominiums following a neighborhood meeting. Barnhart noted the traffic numbers were provided by ITE. Lemke asked what Staff believes are the main issues. Page 8 of 17 MINUTES OF THE • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,June 19,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Barnhart indicated the main issues would be height and traffic. Barnhart stated he understands the impacts of traffic on the area, but noted the lot is currently vacant and any development will generate some level of traffic. Barnhart stated this area is not zoned residential, and if it is rezoned to residential, it would require approval from the Metropolitan Council at a density of three units per acre. Tom Goodrum, Westwood Professional Services, stated they have listened to the comments of the Planning Commission,the City Council, and the neighbors, and redesigned their plan to be 40 high- quality condominium units rather than 51 apartments. Goodrum stated they are proposing the same footprint but that they have enhanced the building by increasing the height of the ceilings. The number of parking stalls has also been reduced and another 15 feet of buffering along Shadywood Road has been added. The targeted tenants for this site are expected to be empty nesters and retirees,which is also what the residents wanted. Goodrum stated he appreciates Staff's comments, and as it relates to the grading and stormwater calculations,those will be addressed in the near future if approval of the plan is received. Goodrum noted engineering costs a lot of money and that they would like to receive approval prior to incurring those costs. Goodrum stated they understand the main issues are height and traffic and that in their view they meet the seven standards for the RPUD. Goodrum stated while there are arguments on both sides,they believe they have a good argument for life cycle housing. Goodrum stated they are looking from the Planning Commission a recommendation of approval. Goodrum noted the site does have ample room for stormwater ponding and that they are within traffic guidelines for that road. Goodrum stated in their view they are looking at a market that will have the least impact on traffic. As it relates to the environmental impacts,there is a 75-foot buffer to the edge of the wetland and the proposal is close to meeting the additional ten feet required by the City but it depends on whether the balconies would be counted. Goodrum indicated they have also discussed adding more wetland buffer to the Freshwater Business Center as part of this project. Goodrum noted the building is not near the wetland and the stormwater ponds would be located outside the wetland areas. Thiesse asked if there is any way to eliminate one level of the building and construct a larger structure. Goodrum stated the penthouse will make the project financially feasible and that they did look at other options but they were not economically feasible. Goodrum stated unless more parking is eliminated,they would not be able to expand the structure. The flat roof matches the Freshwater building, Byerly's, and other buildings in Navarre. The proposed building at the west end would be 36 feet high along Shadywood Road. Goodrum noted a pitched roof would be well above the 36 feet and that they are minimizing the visual impacts with the flat roof. Thiesse commented he is more concerned with the residents to the rear. Goodrum stated a pitched roof would be taller than a flat roof. Schoenzeit asked if additional acreage could be added to the property so the building could be lowered and the footprint expanded. Page 9 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,June 19,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Goodrum stated there is another 20 acres that are owned by Mr. Ugorets but that property is not contiguous. Schoenzeit stated the height continues to be a problem. Lemke asked if it would be a deal breaker if the top level is eliminated and the number of units reduced. Goodrum indicated it would be. Olson asked what the cost of a condominium unit would be. Alex Ugorets,Applicant, indicated it would be between $600,000 to $700,000. Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 7:38 p.m. Tim Olson, 2510 Old Beach Road, stated he has been asked to speak on behalf of the Old Beach Road neighborhood and to give voice to over 200 community members in opposition to this project. Olson stated they have had the opportunity to review the proposal for this site and find it to be entirely too large. Olson stated the residents recognize that this would have a negative impact on the established community, would negatively impact the quality of life, affect the natural habitat, unnecessarily impact traffic, and steal away the night sky. Olson stated the residents find that this project is in direct opposition to the Orono Community Management Plan. Although the residents acknowledge a person's right to own and develop a property, they support the community goals and recognize the proper development. They are not opposed to development of the property but strongly oppose this particular project. There are rules and regulations Orono has in place to prevent unnecessary and unreasonable developments. These have been put in place after much thought and discussion. This proposal in its magnitude, if approved,would go forward in opposition of the established community goals, city ordinances, and adversely affect the value of the area. The City is guided by a Comprehensive Plan, a plan written in principle and philosophy. In fact, Orono's Comprehensive Plan has been renamed to the Community Management Plan, which emphasizes the word community. Olson stated the title of this plan has been chosen to signify its intent and purpose. The word community is meant to stress the fact that this is, in fact,the plan and desire of the citizens. The retention of Orono's small town sense of community and personal interaction is a guiding factor. Throughout multiple pages of the Community Management Plan, it defines the purpose, and throughout the introduction, emphasizes the guiding principles of a plan, not as a whim, but is meant in repeated words to offer clear guidance for the future. When interpreting the meaning and understanding of the Community Management Plan, implementation of new developments should be weighted most favorably in the guiding principles, which are to protect and preserve Lake Minnetonka and its water quality,to preserve our distinct urban lifestyles and land use patterns,preserve and protect our many natural resources and open spaces and preserve our local character and identity. The Community Management Plan includes six elements critical to the development philosophy. First and foremost are environmental protections and land use. In this, Orono residents place the highest priority on open space, preservation of woodlands,wetlands, habitat, with a particular emphasis on dark skies allowing for the maintenance of a night sky free from light pollution. Additionally, land use which Page 10 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,June 19,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. maintains a historic identity and character of Orono's urban neighbors shall be a key element in Orono's land use planning. The residents have had an opportunity to review Westwood's plan and we find it to be an overwhelmingly and ambitious project, designed outside the extremes of Orono's allowable development of this area. We have found it to be dismissive of community concerns and not particularly accurate in representing the opposition to this project. Olson stated they have reviewed Mr. Barnhart's staff submission to the Commission and appreciate Staff's input. The residents have found that this area would need to be rezoned to RPUD for the implementation of certain housing goals. Mr. Barnhart cites seven significant principles for the RPUD. The Westwood proposal falls woefully short, failing to meet six of the seven; most notably preservation of desirable site characteristics and open space and the protection of sensitive environmental features, a design compatible to the surrounding land uses, sensitive to development in transitional areas located between different land uses, and a development which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. In addition,the Westwood site does not meet the RPUD standards, being half the required acres needed for a development of this size. Further complicating this project is that it has a proposed density of 15.63 units per acres,which exceeds even the maximum allowable density for a properly sized RPUD site,which is 6 to 15 units per acre allowed for the site. Further challenges outlined in Staff's report include the building exceeds the maximum allowable height, is designed with a nonconforming roof, fails to meet several setbacks, and provides for no open space. Additionally,traffic continues to be a great concern for this area. Having experienced this on a daily basis,the residents can assure the Commission that additional traffic concerns from a project of this magnitude have not be adequately addressed to this point, particularly when paired with anticipated growth in areas north and west of Navarre. On its face,this plan appears to ignore the primary and driving tenets of the Community Management Plan for the benefit and development of this particular parcel-a benefit that is being extended to one commercial developer at the expense of the citizens of Orono and its neighboring communities. Olson stated there is a reason Orono has a Community Management Plan and established zoning ordinances. Although the residents appreciate the flexibility of a project, flexibility should not fundamentally change the meaningful restrictions that are in place. The residents ask the Planning Commission to take notice that Westwood is asking the City to take an undeveloped lot that is not large enough to trigger an RPUD and then proposes building a structure that exceeds the maximum number of residential units for a properly sized lot and then proposes the building be constructed with a nonconforming flat roof. Even with a flat roof, it will exceed the maximum allowed height. To make this building fit,the City must ignore setbacks and open spaces. Olson stated there is nothing about this particular project that remotely meets the City's requirements, preserves the characteristics of the neighborhood, is transitional to the neighboring areas, and is inconsistent with the driving components and philosophy of the Comprehensive Plan. In short,this project is simply too large; and if approved, will forever negatively impact the community and adversely affect growth and future development in the area. The residents ask the Planning Commission to not table this plan but to reject the proposal outright. Further,the residents would ask the Planning Commission and Staff to encourage development of this Page 11 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,June 19,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. property on a much smaller scale nearing the low end of the six units per acre, more suitable for this nonconforming lot size, and to continue to review all future development proposals for this area under the terms reflected in the guiding principles and philosophy of the Community Management Plan that is in place. Olson requested the Planning Commission and Staff also take an opportunity to review Exhibit G submitted by Mr. Kirk Sherman,who was unable to attend tonight's meeting. Olson thanked the Planning Commission for their time. Shawn Macentee, 2490 Old Beach Road, stated when he started considering the application,he looked at the City variances. When looking at variances,the City Council may grant variances in cases where there are practical difficulties and the weight of carrying out the strict letter of the regulations of this chapter, taking into account the character and development of the neighborhood. In considering applications for variances,the Council shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing traffic conditions, light and air, and the risk to public safety and the effects on the values of property, and to grant variances only when it is demonstrated that such actions with be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the chapter. The variance, if granted,will not alter the essential character of the locality. The Planning Commission heard tonight that this five-story building would be very uncharacteristic of this area. Acting on the considerations alone does not constitute practical difficulties. There have been questions tonight whether it is economically feasible to go smaller,which is not one of the considerations under the statute. The granting of such variance is not to serve the convenience of the applicant but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. The Planning Commission also heard a little bit about flexibility for the RPUD regulations. Although flexibility may be something to take into consideration,the standards set forth in the statute say within the RPUD district all development shall be in compliance with certain characteristics. The characteristics of this potential building is that it requires numerous variances that are broad in their scope. The project acreage is half of what is required under the statute. 78-626 lists four exceptions the Council can use to provide a variance, none of which exist on this project. Macentee stated the purpose of the RPUD district is to encourage sensitive development in transitional areas located between different land uses and along significant corridors within the City. Installing a five- story building is not sensitive and is intrusive and inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Macentee stated for anyone who has ever driven Shadywood at rush hour, the traffic lines up from the intersection past the Narrows Bridge pretty much every day. Macentee stated he appreciates putting in parking spaces for this number of people but they will also have people turning in and out of this development on a routine basis,which will further exacerbate the traffic situation. Macentee stated the residents support some type of condominium development on this property but they feel this proposed project is too large. The residents are also concerned that condominiums are turned into apartments when they are not sold. Tom Lowe, 2630 West Lafayette Road, stated his primary concern is the traffic. Lowe stated one night last week the traffic was backed up all the way to Hazelwood in Tonka Bay. If someone is going to make a right turn to go into Wayzata,they have to get into the line of traffic. Lowe stated there is no way they Page 12 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,June 19,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. can get into that line. If they want to take a left turn,they are taking their life into their hands because they have to cross traffic that is going north. Lowe stated unless Hennepin County is going to do something about this intersection, something drastic is going to happen. Lowe stated he questions the veracity of the traffic study because it looks like the traffic numbers were pulled out of a book somewhere. Lowe stated they need to go there at 5:00. Lowe jokingly stated that if this project is approved, he is going to try to get Old Beach Road opened up so traffic can get out that way. Lowe stated the traffic situation is very serious. Lowe stated he also believes the zoning should stay as it is. Dave Schneider,2540 Old Beach Road, stated this is not about Old Beach Road but that the proposal will impact the entire area and will affect everyone that lives there. Schneider stated it is not about opening Old Beach Road again. Schneider stated he is not a traffic engineer or an environmental engineer, but through a grassroots campaign they have gotten over 200 people that are against this project through petitions and meetings. Schneider commented the residents have to remember that Navarre is finally, after 30 years,changing with the dental office, Bridgewater Bank, and Byerly's, but that he does not know if this will help with that transformation. Schneider stated once there is a real transformation at 19 and 15, there may be an opportunity to develop this area. Schneider stated he is not opposed to development but that he is opposed to this project. Ralph Kempf, 3675 Toga Road, stated the preferred choice of the residents would be to leave it natural, but the fact of the matter is that Navarre is one of the two urban destinations of Orono and this lot will get developed at some point. Kempf stated he had mixed feelings when he saw it was up for redevelopment since it would put a high density of people very close to the main intersection of Navarre. Kempf stated it is a given that people on the sidewalks are the building block of a community, and to date,Navarre is transforming and going very much in the right direction in his view. Kempf stated he would ask the Planning Commission and Council to pay attention to something that has been overlooked in Navarre, which has made the business district basically a no pedestrian zone. Kempf stated in his view it is necessary that the City consider a way that people can easily walk to downtown Navarre, and that the way things are set up now is that the people who are going to live on this site will get in their cars to drive to downtown Navarre. Kempf stated hopefully the Council will look at a pedestrian connection between the Navarre Park,the Navarre business district, and the Dakota Rail Trail since there is not currently a safe pedestrian access to downtown Navarre and that trail. Kempf commented it is unfortunate that this development did not happen before the Freshwater redevelopment took place because somebody would have made sure that there was some sort of trail or sidewalk along the road in this area. Kempf noted the City advocated for and got Hennepin County to agree to redevelop the intersection in 2019 and that it would be wonderful if the City could figure out a way to incorporate pedestrian friendly methods of travel. Kempf stated in his view this kind of development is a good one in the overall larger picture. Page 13 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,June 19,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Sandra Keegan, Walters Point Lane, stated the height is the scary part of this proposal, and once someone puts up a building that size,there is no going back. Keegan stated in his view Navarre is changing for the better,but that this property has been vacant for a while so they do not have to rush to develop it. Tom Goodrum stated in his view they can work with Staff on the RPUD standards and that they are willing to put a trail in. Goodrum noted they have heard several times concerns about the size of the parcel. Goodrum noted they have more than 2.5 acres with this parcel and that they can add 18 more acres to the property. Goodrum stated in his opinion these items can be resolved. Goodrum stated as it relates to the traffic, it comes down to perception, and that the actual traffic numbers show what is happening out. In addition, in regards to height, Orono has other similar buildings three and four stories high that have been approved, and that it comes down to someone's perception of the height. Alex Ugorets, 175 Brentwood Road, stated he can understand why the residents are not happy about the project since it will impact their lives. Ugorets stated any development will affect the neighborhood but that 30 feet only allows for a two-story building with a decent ceiling height. Ugorets stated the footprint is the way it has to be, and that if they are talking about 20 units versus 40 units,there is no way in this day and age a building can be constructed for that few units. Ugorets commented he also cannot think of another project that will minimize the traffic and fit all the criteria that everybody desires. Ugorets stated he would love to accommodate everybody here, but if he did that, it would be a parking lot, which is not going to happen. Ugorets noted an office building will generate more traffic. Ugorets stated the higher the building,the more people want to be on the upper floor for the views. Ugorets stated the building they are proposing is barely making it, but what makes it feasible is to put the penthouse up there. Ugorets requested the Planning Commission to either deny or approve the application. If it is denied,the City should revisit the Comprehensive Plan and guide people for something that is doable on this site and not somebody's dream. Ugorets stated he understands the property is guided to 15 units per acre and that they can move some property lines around to meet the density. Ugorets stated he would like to get clear direction on whether the Planning Commission recommends approval or denial before he spends any more money on the project. Ugorets stated the footprint and height are in stone and that he will not redesign and come back with another project. Ugorets stated people in single-family homes or townhouse projects do not want to live next to an office building. Ugorets stated every time there is a multi-family building guided, it is next to a busy road,and that they changed their proposal from an apartment building to condominiums because they thought the residents would be happier with the condominiums Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 8:12 p.m. Schoenzeit stated it is clear that the intersection of County Roads 19 and 15 does not work and that 95 percent of the traffic comes from the south and the other three directions are almost empty. Schoenzeit Page 14 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,June 19,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. stated a police officer directing traffic would be far more efficient than a stoplight. Schoenzeit encouraged the City to move this intersection up to a higher priority independent of what happens with this property. Chair Thiesse reopened the public hearing at 8:15 p.m. John Frewalds noted the latest edition of Lakeshore has an article written by him regarding the traffic in this area. Frewalds commented the Lakeshore Weekly liked his article on traffic so much he will be doing a regular column on it. Frewalds stated a good way to look at traffic is to look at it as a glass that is full, and then when you add two more drops, it overflows, which is where they are right now. Frewalds noted they have had to add boulders at the cul-de-sac since GPS shows that it is a through road. Frewalds suggested the speed limit from Shadywood down to County Road 30 be reduced. Thiesse noted it is a county road and that only the state can change it. Thiesse closed the public hearing at 8:16 p.m. Thiesse stated he cannot get over the height of the building in the back. Thiesse stated in his view this site is a condominium site and that the applicants have done a wonderful job in designing the building but that the height is an issue for him. Thiesse stated they are looking at an RPUD,which allows for some flexibility, but that the applicant has said he has no more flexibility. Lemke noted the traffic will be impacted no what goes on this site so it is not as much of a factor. Thiesse commented this is the best use for the property as it relates to traffic. Lemke stated he also has issues with the height since it seems to be too much building for the area. Landgraver stated the proposed use does seem to be an optimal use of the site in terms of minimizing the traffic impact. Landgraver stated he is struggling with the height and in his view it is too much. Landgraver commented it is unfortunate the economics do not work for a building that is not as high. While the Planning Commission has always been sensitive to views of the lake and the visual nature of Orono, the height of the penthouse pushes it too much. Olson stated he is in agreement with Commissioner Landgraver and that he cannot support the project. Schwingler indicated he also is in agreement with the other commissioners. Schoenzeit stated when the proposed density is above what it is guided for, it shows that there is not enough land. Schoenzeit stated the height of the building is the number one show stopper. Schoenzeit asked if including the wetlands would help the dry buildable calculations. Barnhart stated the City does not include the wetlands or the wetland buffer in that calculation. Barnhart noted there is some flexibility in shifting the property line, but it raises the question of how shifting that property line will impact setbacks. In addition,the height of the building, density, and traffic are also other issues that have been discussed tonight. Page 15 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,June 19,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Thiesse stated the City has no control over who drives on the road. Landgraver noted the City keeps kicking the density issue down the road and that this was a constructive approach to reaching maximum density on the site. Landgraver stated in his view the higher density helps Orono to a certain extent. Schwingler stated he agrees the density has to be figured out and that this was a good solution. Lemke stated he would prefer the Planning Commission take action on this item tonight. Thiesse stated he wishes there was more flexibility but that the applicant has indicated he cannot reduce the size of the building. Ugorets commented he could put in affordable housing with 500 square foot units and keep it at 30 feet. Landgraver moved,Lemke seconded,to recommend denial of Application No. 17-3944,Westwood Professional Services on behalf of Ugorets,8098,LLC,2520 Shadywood Road,Zoning Change and Master Plan Review. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. 6. UPDATE ON CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS HELD ON MAY 22,2017,AND JUNE 12, 2017 Barnhart reported on the following actions by the City Council: • Appointed John Thiesse to the Planning Commission for a third term; • Approved on the Consent Agenda Jim Kirkland's request for a sign; • Approved the Orono Public Schools' request for a conditional use permit for the mechanical building and outdoor kitchen; • Approved Black Bear Builders' request for a generator pad; • Approved the TC Homes application at 1325 Rest Point Lane following public comment; • Denied Westlake Development's application for construction staging; • Approved Orono Public Schools' request for a bus garage subject to an acceptable screening plan and relocation of the fuel tank; • Approved John Bailey's permit for slope restoration; • Approved Jason Peterson's application but denied the deck variance; • Approved the Orono Public Schools and City of Orono text amendment; • The text amendment for small lots was approved with the setbacks being reduced to 7.5 feet and 10 feet. The City Council followed the recommendation of the Planning Commission with regard to unimproved rights-of-way. 7. OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION Barnhart introduced Laura Oakden, Orono City Planner,to the Planning Commission. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS Page 16 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,June 19,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. None ADJOURNMENT Theisse moved,Schoenzeit seconded,to adjourn the Orono Planning Commission meeting at 8:31 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. ATTEST: 2 • John Thiesse, Chair Page 17 of 17