Loading...
092704 CC Reg Min . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 2004 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING Mayor Love called the meeting to order at 7: 11 P.M. A. Roll Call Present: Mayor Love; Councilmembers Garfunkel, Lizee, Turgeon, and Zerby; Administrator Dawson; Attorney Keane; Engineer Brown; Finance Director Burton; and Planning Director Nielsen Absent: None B. Review Agenda Turgeon moved, Zerby seconded, Approving the Agenda as presented. Motion passed 5/0. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, September 13, 2004 Zerby moved, Lizee seconded, Approving the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of September 13, 2004, as presented. Motion passed 5/0. 3. CONSENT AGENDA Garfunkel moved, Zerby seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda and Adopting the Resolutions Therein: A. Approval of the Verified Claims List B. Staffing - No Action C. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 04-082, "A Resolution Establishing an Absentee Ballot Board for the 2004 General Election." D. Authorizing Expenditure of Funds for a Park Utility Vehicle E. Authorizing Expenditure of Funds for a Mower F. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 04-083, "A Resolution Accepting Smithtown Road Pavement Rehabilitation Project and Authorizing Final Payment for City Project 01-12, S.A.P. 216-101-13." G. Authorizing Release of Escrow for Sylvia Development (Shorewood Ponds Development) CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 27, 2004 Page 2 of 10 . Motion passed 5/0. 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented. 5. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS None. 6. PUBLIC HEARING None. 7. PARKS Engineer Brown explained there had not been a meeting of the Park Commission since the most recent Regular City Council meeting; thus, there was nothing to report. 8. PLANNING Commissioner Gniffke reported on matters considered and actions taken at the September 21, 2004, Planning Commission Meeting (as detailed in the minutes ofthat meeting). . A. Sign Permit Request Applicant: Fitness 19 Location: 23730 Highway 7 (Shorewood Village Center) Director Nielsen stated at its last meeting, the City Council approved a sign permit for Fitness 19 at the Shorewood Village Shopping Center. Howard Humbyrd had now applied for a temporary sign permit to display a banner while his permanent sign was being made. Director Nielsen went on to explain that under the City Code, each property was allowed two temporary sign permits per year for seven days at a time. Permits could run back-to-back for a total of 14 days. The sign could not exceed 32 square feet in area and the permit must be approved by the City Council. In this case, Director Nielsen stated, the applicant had already displayed a temporary banner for approximately three weeks, without any permit, having been advised in advance that signs required Council approval. The banner remained in place even after staff threatened removal. The authority for this action was a result of the signed development agreement for the Center, due to this specific type of violation in the past. The manager of the Center had complained that new businesses should be allowed to display temporary signs until their permanent ones have been made (in this case the estimated time would be approximately 4-6 weeks). Staff advised the applicant there was a process for amending not only the current conditional use permit for the Center, but also the Code itself. To date no such application had been made. . Given the violation of City Code, and the fact that a temporary sign has been displayed in excess of what was allowed, even with a permit, Director Nielsen recommended denial ofthis permit request. John Owen, consultant representing Fitness 19, stated he was present this evening to ask for a temporary signage for a banner to display the words "NOW OPEN" for the weeks of October 11 through October . CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 27, 2004 Page 3 of 10 24, 2004. He stated the banner would be within the required square footage allotment and would be placed there within the time limits allowed. In response to Councilmember Garfunkel's question, Mr. Owen explained there had been a banner displayed inside the building previously and once a violation was noted, it was removed. He went on to explain the landlord had granted permission for the banner inside the mall area as part of the lease agreement. He apologized for the misunderstanding about the issue of signage, and noted the previous banner had stated "FITNESS 19 JOIN NOW." This banner had been removed, and the store had been in compliance for three weeks. He restated his request to allow the temporary banner to be placed once the store actually took up occupancy of the site, as he believed it a visibility issue for potential clients. In response to Councilmember Lizee's question, Mr. Owen stated he was asking for the banner in addition to the permitted signage approved by Council at past meetings. Director Nielsen explained he had spoken with Mr. Humbyrd earlier in the planning process, and he had personally informed Mr. Humbyrd the signage was not allowed without permit. The banner was hung anyway for three weeks with photo dated evidence of this action. Mr. Owen stated he was not disputing the actions of the past, but was asking for the banner to be placed in the weeks of October 11 through October 24, 2004, to announce the opening of the store and allow visibility. . Turgeon moved, Lizee seconded, Denying a Request for a Sign Permit for Fitness 19, 23730 Highway 7 (Shorewood Village Center). Motion passed 5/0. B. Variances to Setback and Expansion of a Nonconforming Structure (Att.- Planning Director's memorandum, Draft Resolution) Applicant: Todd Meixner Location: 25625 Birch Bluff Road Director Nielsen explained the history of the case noting the applicant was in the process of renovating the home at 25625 Birch Bluff Road. Plans included converting a very small, attached garage to living space and building a new garage on the north side of the house. Director Nielsen also explained the house was entirely outside of the buildable area of the lot. Although the garage itself complied with setbacks, a 12-foot wide portion of the addition that connected the garage to the house necessitated a variance of 5.5 feet. An eight-foot deck/entry connecting the house and garage also required a variance. With only 13,271 square feet of area, the property was considered substandard for the R-IC zoning district in which it was located. The proposed garage and the living area above it measured 22' x 30' and contained 660 square feet on each level. If approved, the remodeling plan would result in the house having a total of 2980 square feet. . Upon analysis of the case, Director Nielsen explained Shorewood's Zoning Code allowed the expansion of nonconforming single-family homes, provided the addition itself complied with zoning requirements. In this case, he explained, the garage addition complied with the setback requirements for the R-IC/S district, but the connection to the house (66 square feet) and approximately three-fourths ofthe deck (90 square feet) were outside the buildable area of the lot. Director Nielsen also stated it was worth noting that the configuration of the lot and the resulting limited buildable area were the result of past roadway encroachments from both Eureka Road and Birch Bluff Road. Based upon Staff research, the house actually existed before the right-of-way for Eureka was platted. The r.o.w. was platted through the house and then subsequently a portion of the r.o.w. was vacated back to the property. On the north side of the CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 27, 2004 Page 4 of 10 . lot, public use of Birch Bluff Road cut off the northeast corner of the lot until, several years ago, the owner of the property granted the City an easement for the encroachment. As planned, impervious surfaces on the site would amount to 24.8 percent of the lot area, which was considered to be consistent with R-IC/S requirements. Director Nielsen also stated the ratio of the floor area of all structures on this lot would be approximately 27 percent, well within the Zoning Code maximum of 30 percent for substandard properties. Director Nielsen recommended approval with two stipulations. The renovation and conversion of the existing garage must be done so as not exceed 50 percent of its value. That is, the frame portion of the garage simply must be able to be repaired and not reconstructed. The City's Building Official advised that the foundation under the garage must be replaced. Secondly, the floor plan for the proposed garage must include a direct connection between the house and the living area above the garage. Without such a connection, the garage would exceed the 1200 square feet allowable floor area for accessory space. Councilmember Lizee stated she liked the improvements to the property, and had heard neighborhood satisfaction related to the project. Lizee moved, Zerby seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 04-084, "A Resolution Granting a Setback Variance to Todd Meixner." Motion passed 5/0. C. Variances to Setback and Expansion of a Nonconforming Structure Applicants: R.J. and Melanie Rogney Location: 5950 Grant Street . Director Nielsen explained the history of the case noting the applicants proposed adding a second story over the rear half of the home at 5950 Grant Street. The addition would be built over a single-story portion of the home for which a variance was granted in 1983. The property in question was zoned R-ID, Single-family Residential and contained 10,560 square feet of area. Besides the home, the lot was occupied by a detached garage and an above-ground swimming pool, neither of which complied with R- ID setback requirements. The garage appeared to have pre-dated current zoning requirements, while there was no record of a permit having been issued for the swimming pool, making it an unlawful nonconformity. In addition to nonconforming setbacks, existing hardcover on the lot was at 52 percent, where 33 percent was the maximum allowed. The existing house contained approximately 1425 square feet of floor area on two levels, not including the basement. The proposed addition would add 464 square feet for a total of 1889 square feet for two additional bedrooms. Since the house was only 11.8 feet from the rear lot line, the applicants' plans necessitated a setback variance of 23.2 feet. Director Nielsen then reviewed the history of the previous variance, noting the 1983 variance was granted under slightly different conditions than the current request. He also noted the City imposed a condition on the variance approval that made up for the discrepancy on the rear by imposing additional front yard setback. Under the R-ID zoning regulations, this would result in a 53-foot front yard setback. . With regard to the analysis of the criteria for a variance, Director Nielsen also explained it was questionable how the application complied with the criteria. Specifically, there was nothing unique about the lot. The rezoning in 1986 resulted in the lot conforming to current zoning requirements. There was ample room on the lot to construct a house and garage. The variance in 1983 was granted to allow CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 27, 2004 Page 5oflO . reasonable use of the property. The addition at that time provided for reasonable use of the property by allowing for a bedroom, bathroom and dining room to be located on the main level of the house. The applicant stated that extending the building outward into the buildable area of the lot would increase the already nonconforming impervious surface to lot area ratio. In this regard, Director Nielsen also noted there was a considerable amount of impervious surface to be eliminated on the site, including the swimming pool and patio built without a permit and within the required setback. He also stated, whether or not the variance was granted, the pool and patio were in violation of City Code requirements and should be eliminated. Director Nielsen noted Ronald and Melanie Rogney, applicants, were present this evening and wished to address the Council. Mrs. Rogney explained the pool had been dismantled as requested by the City over the past weekend. Mr. Rogney then explained the pool had been installed by a contractor that the Rogneys had assumed had applied for the appropriate permits from the City as had been directed by the Rogney's at the time of installation. It was only upon discussing this variance request with City Staff that they had been made aware that the permits had never been applied for in this matter. Mr. Rogney apologized and noted the pool had been in its location for seven years, without indication of non-compliance with City regulations. Mrs. Rogney explained the aggregate patio was still remaining on the lot, and she requested the Council consider allowing a portion of this patio to remain on the site, as it provided a place for entertainment. She also stated, if allowed to remain, she would like to provide additional landscaping around the patio area. . In response to Mrs. Rogney's request for clarification on the setback issues, Director Nielsen explained that the past variance allowed for shifting the setback areas on the site in order to allow the requested construction to move forward. He also stated the removal of the pool and patio would bring the site into compliance for the current variance request. Mr. Rogney stated the addition being requested would not be built beyond the current footprint of the house, and the house would resemble a 2-story house versus the current story-and-one-half. Councilmember Turgeon stated she was not seeing a hardship in this case for the current request. Director Nielsen stated this was a somewhat confusing case since the applicants could not add on to the house without asking for a variance. While the "hard line" answer refused this addition, Director Nielsen explained the rules had changed since the house had been constructed and added onto in 1983. He also noted that if the owner had requested this variance in 1983, the variance request would have been granted, and the applicants were not allowed any additional use of their property than anyone would be allowed. Councilmember Turgeon stated she had to give the applicant credit for removing the pool and patio to comply with the City's regulations in this case. Zerby moved, Turgeon seconded, Directing Staff to Prepare Findings of Fact Approving a Variance to Setback and Expansion of a Nonconforming Structure, subject to Staff and Planning Commission Recommendations, for R.J. and Melanie Rogney, 5950 Grant Street. Motion passed 5/0. . D. C.D.P. for Accessory Space Over 1200 Sq. Ft. Applicants: Tom Kelsey and Ingrid Schaff Location: 5705 Smithtown Way . . . CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 27, 2004 Page 6 of 10 Director Nielsen explained the applicant had applied for a conditional use permit to construct accessory space in excess of 1200 square feet on the property located at 5705 Smithtown Way. Ms. Schaff and Mr. Kelsey proposed building a new detached garage to the north and east of the house. Since the area of the new garage, combined with an existing small tuck-under garage, exceeded 1200 square feet, a c.u.P. was required. Director Nielsen went on to explain the property was zoned R-IC, Single-Family Residential and contained 41,755 square feet in area. The new garage contained 1,024 square feet. This accessory structure, combined with the existing garage, totaled 1,539 square feet. As demonstrated on the plans, the proposed garage would be 50 feet from the front lot line and approximately 28 feet from the westerly side lot line. He also noted the existing home contained 2,295 square feet of floor area in one and one half stories. Director Nielsen also explained the request met all necessary criteria for granting a Conditional Use Permit, and it was worth noting the garage was tucked into a side slope off the existing driveway. Also, considering the landscaping that existed on the property, no additional landscaping was required. Council had no questions regarding this case. Turgeon moved, Lizee seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 04-085, "A Resolution Granting a Conditional Use Permit for Additional Accessory Space to Ingrid Schaff and Tom Kelsey, 5705 Smithtown Way." Motion passed 5/0. E. Minor Subdivision/Combination Applicant: David Blume Location: 5240 / 5250 Vine Hill Road Director Nielsen explained the history of the case, noting the applicants, David Blume and Kelly Dixon, owned the properties at 5240 and 5250 Vine Hill Road, respectively. Due to historic landscaping patterns, they had requested a lot line rearrangement (minor subdivision and combination) to coincide with how they had used their properties. They proposed shifting the common lot line between their properties by four feet. Director Nielsen went on to explain this request was quite simple. Both lots would still comply with the requirements of the R-IC zoning district, and building setbacks would also still conform to zoning requirements. As such, approval of the division and combination was recommended. The applicants should record the conveyance within 30 days of their receipt of the resolution approving the request. In response to Councilmember Garfunkel's question, Director Nielsen explained he had not been made aware of the need by the applicants' for the ')og" in the proposed lot line rearrangement. A brief discussion ensued regarding clarification related to the Planning Commission's recommendation for this case. Turgeon moved, Lizee seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 04-086, "A Resolution Approving a Subdivision and Combination of Real Property, subject to the condition of extending the new lot line straight back to the rear property line, for David Blume and Kelly Dixon." Motion passed 5/0. F. Minor Subdivision Applicants: Location: Andrew and Dorothy Meldahl 6180 Cathcart Drive . . CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 27, 2004 Page 7 of 10 Director Nielsen stated in 1991 the applicants split their property at 6180 Cathcart Drive into three lots. They subsequently sold the westerly lot and had since recombined the easterly two lots. They now wished to redivide the lots exactly as they were in 1991. He went on to state, with one exception, there are no issues to speak of relative to this request. The one item for consideration was the issue of park dedication fees that were required when new lots were created. Although these charges were paid in 1991, the rates were less ($750) than they were at this point in time ($1500). Consequently, Staff recommended the difference be made up at this time. Subject to the applicant paying $750, and recording the division within 30 days of receipt of the Council Resolution approving the division, approval of the minor division was recommended. Council had no questions regarding this case. Garfunkel moved, Turgeon seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 04-087, "A Resolution Approving a Subdivision of Real Property for Andrew and Dorothy Meldahl." Motion passed 5/0. 9. GENERALINEW BUSINESS A. Resolution regarding Legislation Mfecting Six Mile Creek, LMCD Administrator Dawson explained that at the September 13, 2004, Regular City Council meeting, the Council had reviewed issues regarding Six Mile Creek with Tom Skramstad, Chair of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) and Shorewood's representative to the LMCD. The primary matter was legislation adopted at the end of the 2004 session which superseded the LMCD's authority to regulate boat access on Six Mile Creek. He went on to explain the LMCD had suggested a model resolution to its 14 member cities regarding its opposition to the action taken by the Legislature. At the September 13th meeting, the Council indicated it would like to consider a resolution stating its disagreement with the Legislative process on this matter, and stating its encouragement for the LMCD to work with owners of four properties regarding riparian rights to Lake Minnetonka. Councilmember Zerby stated he believed the proposed resolution shared by City Staff this evening had captured the viewpoints he heard at the last meeting of the Council. Zerby moved, Lizee seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 04-088, "A Resolution Relating to the Jurisdiction of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District and Minnesota Laws 2004, Chapter 255, Section 243, Regarding Six Mile Creek." Mayor Love stated this issue would be a topic of discussion at an upcoming "Mayors' Meeting" where the member cities heard from the legislators on this topic. He stated he believed this issue needed to be discussed publicly in the future. Councilmember Lizee stated she thought the issue was a bit tardy in being discussed at the Mayors' Meeting, as she thought the legislature had blatantly abused the process in this matter. In response to Councilmember Garfunkel's question, Attorney Keane stated this resolution if approved could be addressed to key committee members of the legislature, specifically the members of the Local Government Affairs Committee, the Metro Politan Affairs Committee, and the Environment and Natural Resource Committees. . Motion passed 5/0. B. Amending Selection of Park and Planning Commission Chairs . . . CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 27, 2004 Page 8 oft 0 Administrator Dawson explained the Council, at its most recent Regular meeting, had adopted an ordinance amending the terms of Commissioners. While these terms would remain three-year terms, they would run from March 1 to the last day of February. Also, Council had directed Staff to prepare an ordinance to remove the appointment of commission officers by Council and require that the respective commissions select them. Zerby moved, Lizee seconded, Adopting ORDINANCE NO. 407, "An Ordinance Amending Chapters 201 and 202 of the Shorewood City Code Relating to the Planning Commission and Park Commission." Motion passed 5/0. C. Excelsior Branch Library Discussion Administrator Dawson summarized a discussion he had with Councilmember Lizee regarding the Excelsior Branch Library. He explained that Hennepin County currently leased space from the City of Excelsior for the library located in downtown Excelsior. This library was built in the mid-1960 and at that time the South Lake Minnetonka cities contributed funds toward its construction. The current library had approximately 3,500 square feet of space and required approximately two to three times that amount of space for the future. Hennepin County indicated it would not build a new facility, but would seek to lease space for a larger library. To that end, in the latter part of 2003, Hennepin County Library convened a committee of interested parties and residents in the Excelsior area. This committee was called the Library Roles and Services Committee and conducted a preliminary analysis of what services were available, services needed but unable to be provided, and long term planning issues for the County Library. This committee underscored the importance that the Excelsior Branch would serve the larger South Lake Minnetonka community as a whole. Two additional committees were formed. The Library Committee, whose job was to follow-up on the work of the Roles and Services Committee, and was comprised of city representatives, as well as the Public Facilities Work Group, formed by the City of Excelsior. The purpose of the Public Facilities Work Group could be broad, but focused on building needs regarding the Library and Excelsior City Hall. While both groups have been meeting, members of the Library Committee had indicated frustration and disappointment with the current process utilized, since recent discussions had limited the defined users to include the Library and City Hall, with other spaces available to "future tenants" and there would be a parking "area." The Library Committee believed there should be a larger community consensus of how and where the new Library facility should be located. Several Library Committee members had believed, however, that the Facilities Group had been trying to convince them of its preferred alternative to retrofit the building, and to co-opt their consideration of alternative locations. The Library Committee questioned whether such meetings should continue. Administrator Dawson explained that on September 16th, the cities of Deephaven and Greenwood sent letters to the City of Excelsior, informing the latter that they would no longer participate in the work of the Library Committee. Both cities noted there would be little likelihood that they would be participating financially in a new library facility. Councilmember Lizee stated there would be a Joint meeting of the two groups on October 5, 2004, and a meeting of the Library Committee on October 12, 2004. She stated she would like to report back to Council after the October 12,2004, meeting of the Library Committee. In response to Councilmember Turgeon's question, Councilmember Lizee explained the role of the Library Committee was to build community consensus at this point in time. . . . CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 27, 2004 Page 9 of 10 Mayor Love stated he heard Councilmember Lizee state there were holes in the process with reasonable debate being presented; however, in this issue he stated he was not certain this matter had been presented to the public in the right way. If the library was to be a regional asset, then a discussion of a new facility needed to be a regional discussion. Councilmember Turgeon stated she was concerned for tying the project to a new City Hall, parking ramp, etc., as she saw the library construction as being a separate issue. She also stated she thought the process needed to be clearly defined, as she was concerned there were two different agendas for the two different groups. Councilmember Lizee stated she thought the issue needed further discussion by each Committee as the library was a community asset. 10. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS Engineer Brown stated there was nothing further to report at this time. 11. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Administrator & Staff 1. County Road 19 Construction Update Engineer Brown reported the temporary signal was strung at an improper height for tall vehicles within the intersection. Hennepin County representatives were notified several days ago and City Staff would continue to work with County representatives in the future to have this matter fixed. Councilmember Zerby stated the signals worked well in timing and he was personally pleased with how the intersection functioned. He also stated he realized the intersection was better currently than in the past, but he was concerned there were no long term solutions. B. Mayor & City Council Mayor Love reported on the EFD Governing Board Meeting of September 18,2004. He stated the Board heard concerns from Captain Brandy Parker representative of many of the firefighters within the Excelsior Fire District. Councilmember Turgeon stated she had been present at that meeting as well, and found the firefighters to be united in their concerns. The largest concern heard by the Board dealt with communication and subsequent roles of firefighters, Board, Fire District Officers, and how each group needed to work with each other. She stated the issues heard could be worked through mutual respect. In response to Councilmember Turgeon's question, Engineer Brown reported he was waiting for a report from WSB and Associates, the City's consulting firm, regarding possible outcomes for Radisson Road.