The URL can be used to link to this page

1983 pl mn . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY, JANUARY 4, MEETING 1983 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:30 P.M. M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER Chairman Benson called the January 4, 1983 Planning Commision meeting to order at 7:45 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Commission members Richard Spellman, Bob Shaw (late) , Bruce Benson, Frank Reese, Vern Watten, Janet Leslie, Planner Brad Nielsin, Assistant Kathy West. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES Spellman moved, Leslie seconded, to approve the min~tes from the December 7, 1982 Planning Commission meeting. The motion carried unaimously. ~~g~~~I_I2~_~~~I~~~~~l~I~~1~_~~~QI~I~12~ Dennis Otteson was present for an informal review of his applica- tion to subdivide property located at 27200 West 62nd Street. Variances for lot width and the simple subdivision procedure were requested. Otteson explained that he wished to split the lot in two, enabling him to build a new house on the western parcel. The existing house will remain and that lot be sold. It was noted that the proposed lot lines were drawn to accommodate the structures and the topog- raphy while at the same time provide approximately equal square foot- age for each parcel. Otteson mentioned that he was changing the pro- posed southern lot lines to 120 and 180 feet as suggested in the Planner's report. He noted that he planned to move the existing accessory building (20 by 4.0 feet) to the back of the lot. The Planning Com~ission d~scussed the need for a street dedication along the southern portion of the property and for turn around area. It was noted that an easement for the sewer exists now. Surrounding properties were described as residential in use. The Planner's report showed possible subdivision schemes for the property to the north ~ith development potential), demonstrating road access to the northern portion of Otteson's land. Spellman moved, Benson seconded for discussion, to recommend that the Council approve the request to subdivide, with the variances for lot width and simple subdivision procedure, subject to the seven recom- mendations in the City Planners's report (dated 30 December 1982). The Commission discussed the idea of combining the entire north sec- tion of the lot with the parcel that Otteson plans to retain, creating a "dog-leg" shaped lot. The northern portion could be platted as an outlot which might be developed at a later date if road access were made available. Sewer lines from West 62nd Street were noted as a problem because of the topography. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - 2 - JANUARY 4, 1983 ~~g~~~I_=_~Q~II~~~Q Otteson noted that an extent ion of West 62nd Street to Lake Virginia Drive probably would not be feasible given the topography; nor would a connect ion to a future road a long the western side of the property in question seem practical. The Commission felt the motion should clarify/emphasize some of the Planner's recommendations (#'s 1 and 2). It was suggest~d that #3 be -reworded to read: "The widths of the two lots shall be evened up to 120 feet and 80 feet". Spellman amended his motion to recommend that the Council approve the request subject to the seven recommendations listed in the Planner's report, and that the applicant dedicate West 62nd Street across the south portion of his property, and provide an easement for a cul-de- sac as recommended by the'City Engineer. Benson seconded the amended motion and it carried unanimously (6-0). CONTINUED STUDY OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE The Planning Commission reviewed the revisions to part I of the pro- posed Zoning Ordinance. Planner Niel~~;-;ot~d that page 1-24 "Accessory Structures" would be provid~d later. The following corrections/changes/additions were suggested. Subd. 13 ~~~2:.l~_!:!.~~~ - typographical error in the first line - "of" should be "or". Sub d. 1 5 2.E.~2:.~~.E.r_!:!.2:.B.~_~~!~.E._~~.E.1 - "... p e rma n e n t f low 0 r . . ." s h 0 u I d be deleted from the last sentence. Reese moved, Leslie seconded, to recommend that Chapter 200 of the proposed Zoning Ordinance (with corrections and with the exception of page 1-24 Accessory Structures) b~ sent to the Council for approval. The motion carried unanimously (6-0). The Planning Commission began a ~!~~r pf the third part of the ordi- nance. The following comments were made: Section 200.18 - "R-C" District - no problems were noted. Section 200.19 - ~c=I~-Di~t~ict - Planner Nielsen noted that this was -------------- the most drastically changed of the districts. It is very restrictive, low intensity, woth neighborhood-type uses. Nielsen suggested that this might be used as a transitional district, a land use gradation. Section 200.20 "C-2" District - no problems were noted. Section 200.21 ~C=3~-Di~t~ict - Subd. 2 item a. (3) Animal clinics - s h 0 u I d b-e--c-h-a-n-g-e-d--t-o--r e a d - ., ( wit h no 0 u t door 0 v ern i g h t car e ) " . It was suggested that a differentiation between animal hospital and clinic be made, or that veciinary animal hospital be used. Subd. 5 1~!_~~g~2:..E.~~~~!~_~~~_~~!~~~1~. d. (2) rear yard - change to read - "Not less than thirty (30) feet", and d. (3) side yard- "Not less than !.L~!~~~_il~I-f~~t"-:- Concern was expressed with regards to fire protection and the lot and building requirements. The Planner agreed to check the text with the fire marshal. Section 200.22 ~1=~~_1~1~~~~.E.~_~~~.E.~~!2:.~~~l_Q2:.~!.E.2:.~! - no changes were noted for this section. . . , PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -3- JANUARY 4, 1983 fQ~!I~~~Q_~!~Q~_QI_!!:!'~_~Q~I~Q_Q~QI~~~f~ Section 200.24 "S" Shoreland District - Nielsen noted that this . ---------------------- section is consistant with State guidelines and that the DNR will have to review it. He pointed out text changes: ~~~~~_l - the 1 a s t ph r a s e s h 0 u 1 d rea d: "M inn e sot aRe g u I a t ion s N R 8 2 - 8 4 ',' . Subd. 3 - It was noted that Surface Water is the same as Public ------- Water as defined in section 200.02. A typographical error - "d" should be deleted from surfaced water. The sentence begin- ning with "In the case of conflict..." should be deleted. ~~~~~_~_~~_il2. - "normal high water mark" should be changed to "ordinar,y high water mark". Subd. 5 a. (3) - one asterisk (>'<) should be placed ater "Set- ~;c~-f~o;-o~dianry high water mark". ~~~~~_~_~~_i~2. - should read "Setback of roads, parking or impervious surface areas form ordinary high water mark***" Subd. 5 a. -k_ the second sentence, starting with "Boathouses" ~hould-~~7d~ieted. ~~~~~_~_~~_.:.:.:.: _ delete the word "boathouses," from the sentence. Subd. 5 b. - change to read: ".. .Hennepin County Registrar of D~~d~-o;-or before the effective date of this ordinance, which does not.~~~------ ~~~~~_~_~~ - the third sentence, starting with "The plan shall minimiz~ tree removal..." should be deleted. Typographical error -I "relocation of replanting" should be "or". Subd. 6! a. (1) (a) and (b) - "RA" and "R-l" should be changed to-~R=I4\_;-R=IB_;-R=Ic_;-;;d-R-2A, R-2B, R-2C" and possibly "R-L". Subd. 7.' a. (1) - Should be changed to read: "Clearcutting is p~ohi~if~d-;it h i nth ere qui red set b a c k are as, and..." Subd. 7,. (3) - should be changed to read: "...structures visual- Ii-i;cohspic u 0 us. . . " ------ The Pla~ning Commission questioned the definitions of clear- cutting, and selective cutting. Nielsen noted that he will check ipto the subject, possibly adding additional requirements. Sub d. 7:. b. (1) (d) and (h) - c h a n g e " nor m a I " h i g h wa t e r mar k to-~o~di;;~y~~------------- Sub d. 7 '. b. ( 3) - " con n e c t e d " s h 0 u I d be" con n e c t ion" . -------t-------- Subd. 8'. Planned Unit Development - The introductory sentence should-f~;d-~~h~-~I;;;~d-ij;It-D~;elopment provisions contained in Sect~on 200.06 of this Ordinance may be utilized within a Shorelahd District when consistant with the provisions of this ~~~!2:.~~' and provided-th;t-th~-follo;I;g-~~quI~~;;~;ts-;~~-s;t= isfactolrily met." Subd. 8,. d. (7) - "Council" should be changed to "Board". -------r-----.---- ~~~~~_~~ items f, g, h should be deleted. e. - the letter identifications should be dropped and the: paragraph shifted so it is not indented. Subd. lp. - this subdivision should be renamed Subd. 11, and ;-;~;-Su~d. 10 should be added based on cqanges by the DNR regardi~gnotification procedures. Nielsen noted that he will del i veri t his s e c t ion. It was noted tl!1at the ADMINISTRATIVE section of the Ordinance would be rev i ewe. d at; the n e x t me e tin g . . . . ./ PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -4- JANUARY 4, 1983 It was noted that the counjil would be interviewing prospective Planning Commi sion members. Park Commission: Staff reported that a request for a hockey tourna- ment was sent to the Council for approval. The Commission also had started working on a budget for the Park Capital improvement Fund. REPORTS Council: ADJOURNMENT Watten mov~d, Spellman seconded, to adjourn. The motion carried unanimously and the meeting was adjourned at 10:12 P.M. Respectfully submitted, 7(~ av.--w&d:;- Kathleen West, Planning Assistant . , , CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING CCJMMJtSSION MEETING FEBRUARY 1, 1983 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUN'IRY CLUB ROAD 7:30 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chainnan Benson called the February 1st Plann.ing Corrnnission meeting to order at 7:41 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Bruce Benson, Frank Reese, Vern Watten, Janet Leslie, Richard Spellman, Mary Boyd; Council Liaison Tad Shaw, Planner Brad Nielsen, Assistant Kathy West. Absent: Commissioner Bob Shaw. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES Leslie moved, Spellman seconded, to approve the minutes from the January 4, 1983 Planning Corrnnission meeting as written. The motion carried unanimously. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR Mary Boyd was introduced as the appointee for Kristi Stover's position on the Plann.ing Commission. It was announced that Brad Nielsen will be starting as full-time Planner/Building Inspector for the City on February 14th. REPORTS CITY COUNCIL: Council Liaison Tad Shaw reported Council action on the Naegele sign at Christmas Lake Road and Highway 7; Cable TV agreement; dock permits; and Council appointments. PARK COMMISSION: Staff noted that Commissioners were looking at a program to spotlight the parks, with a possible corrmuni ty picnic for the summer. CONTINUED STUDY OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE Planner Nielsen presented final revisions for ~arts I and III of the proposed ordinance. Tne Commission agreed to study them independently and continue the discussion at the next meeting. Corrections on page 1-24 (section d. Accessory Buildings, Uses and Equipment (4)) were discussed at length. It was suggested that a 1,000 square foot limitation on ~cessory structures might be too restrictive - that multiple family dwellings should be excluded from this item. The Commission debated the merits of adding a provision which would require garages in the different zoning districts. Screen- ing requirements for out-door storage were also discussed. Spellman moved, Watten seconded, to require garages with aPartments. The legality of such a requirement was questioned. Reese moved, Benson seconded, to amend the previous motion referring the question back to the Planner for consultation with the City Attorney, then to bring the mat- ter back for discussion at the next study session. . e.. I.. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FEBRUARY 1, 1983 - 2 - STUDY OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE - continued... The original motion was amended by a 4 to 2 vote; (Ayes: Benson, Reese, Leslie, Boyd) (Nays; Watten, Spellman) The amended motion was voted upon and it carried unanimously, 6' to O. Reese moved, Spellman seconded, to recommend that the ordinance be a nended to require an enclosed garage space per unit in a residential area. The vote on the motion was tied, 3 to 3: (Ayes; Benson, Reese, Spellman) (Nays; Watten, Leslie, Boyd) Tne Corrnnission reviewed Part II of the proposed ordinance. Nielsen oxplained that the administrative procedures had been updated according to Stave Statutes, and standardized within the ordinance in terms of public hearings, the notifi- cation procedures, and timing requirements. It was also noted that the current P.U.D. Ordinance will be inserted as Section 200.06. Five hundred feet; was noted as the standard boundary for notifying neighboring property owners of any public hearing. It was suggested that applicmts should be required to provide, at their own expense, a list of property owners certified by the County fori such notification purposes. The Corrnnission discussed the possibility of requiring signs on the site of pro- posed plattings and rezonings. It was suggested that posting the request could remain an unwritten policy rather than a written part of the zoning ordinance. The Planning Comrn;ission agreed to review the entire ordinance at the next meeting. ADJOURNMENT Spellman moved, Watten seconded, to adjourn. The motion carried 1 the meeting was adjourned at 9:20 P.M. . ously and Respectfully submitted, -7{atiL~6V~ Kathleen West, Planning Assistant . . . CI'lY OFSHOREWOOD PlANNING CCM-ITSSION STIJDY SESSION TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 1983 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNl'RY CLUB ROAD 7:30 P.M. MINUTES CALL. TO.. ORDER Chainnan Benson called the meeting to order at 8:20 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Cornnissioners Bruce Benson, Vern Watten, Janet Leslie, Mary Boyd; Council Liaison )'fad Shaw; Planner Brad Nielsen; Assistant Kathy West. Absent: Cornnissioners Frank Reese, Richard Spellman, Bob Shaw. APPROVAL OF THE.. MINUI'ES Leslie moved, Watten seconded, to approve the minutes from the February 1, 1983 Planning Conmission meeting as written. I The motion carried unanimous 1 y, 4-0. MATIERS FRCM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor at this time. REPORTS City Council: Mr. Shaw reported from the February 14th meeting, noting that the Council had approved the Howards Point Marina dock permit; approved 1983 cigarette licenses; passed an ordinance regulating conduct in City parks.. and beaches; denied the Hurmer variance request by fonn- at resolution; and, re . ewed the bond report. Park Conmis$ion: Staff reported that t e Park Conmission was continuing discussion on the. conmunity picnic, and on playground. equip:nent for the parks. FINAL REVIEW OF THE PROPOSED ZONING ORD NANCE TEXT The Cornnission discussed the final corr ctions to the zoning ordinance. Planner Nielsen noted that a memo would be sent to the Council noting the discussion re- garding garage requirements (see Februa 1, 1983 Planning Conmission minutes). Leslie moved, Watten seconded, to appro e the final draft of the zoning ordinance and to send it to Council for reviewal. The motion carried unanimously, 4-0. MATIERS FRa1 'mE FLOOR Mayor Rascop suggested that. a special g 1 setting meeti be set up between the Council and City Cornnissions for early rch. AnJOURNMENf Leslie movep, Boyd seconded, to. adjourn The motion ca . ed unanimously and the meeting was adjourned at 8:32 P.M. Respectfully subnitted, '-t(~ WU*- Kathleen West, Planning Assistant . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION ME~TING TUESDAY, MARCH 1, 1983 COUNCIL CH..,\MBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:30 P.M. M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER Chairman Benson called the March 1st Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:40 P.M. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Commissioner~ Frank Reese, Vern Watten (late), Mary Boyd, Bob Shaw, Bruce Benson. Council Liaison Tad Shaw, Planner Brad Nielsen, Assis- tant Kathy W~st. ABSENT: Commissioners Janet Leslie (ill), Richard Spellman. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTE~ Benson moved, Boyd seconded, approval of the February 15, 1983 Planning Commission minutes as written. T~e motion carried unanimously, 4-0. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR Staff informed the Commission of the Annual Minnesota Planning conference to be held March 20th, 21st and 22nd. (Agenda rearrangement) REPORTS City Council: Liaison Tad Shaw reported from the February 28th meeting, noting that the Council had discussed the DNR's continued search for lake access in the area; noted the joint meeting between the Park and Planning Commissions and the Council to be held March 12th; and, reported a discussion of fire lanes. PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Benson openec the public hearing at 7:48 p.m. by reading the published legal notice. The he~ring was called to consider a request by Mr. Gary Winter- field for a conditina use permit for an office building in an R-C, Residential Commercial Zone. An Error in the legal notice waS pointed out, the property in question being locatec at the southwest rather that the southeast corner of Chaska Road and State Highwa-. 7. - Planner Nielsen noted that the same application had been approved in 1978, but the time limit on the permit lapsed before development of the project started. Nielsen informed the Commission that the applicant would not be present and had requested that the hecring be continued at a later meeting. Winterfield decided to redesign plans in <rder to eliminate the need for varian~s, .as suggested in Nielsen's report date< 25 February 1983 (see attachment #1)~ PUBLIC COMMENTS- The following neighboring residents were present to express con<erns. Cindy and Mike Marr, /015 Chaska Road: Pos ible noise problems if the existing pine tree barrier is rem ved from the property in question. Dra nage should be addressed. '1: 01' ~ \ e. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MI UTES -2- March 1, 1983 PUBLIC HEARING - CONTI (Cindy & Mike Marris c Can the design of the building be exercised? Park"n lot li htin should be minimized or eliminated. ts on surrounding property values should be considered. Pam and: Doug Groskreut , 5985 Chaska Road: Acce s to the property and coordination of driveways along Chas a Road were concerns. The uestion of who would be responsible for improvements to the oad was raised. The source of utilities to the lot was questioned. Dick Jepsen, 6020 Galpin Lake Road: Questioned the procedures involved in rezonings, the public hearing notification process, and the City's intentions re- garding zoning. The Commission and the Planner explained that the R-C district is intended as a buffer zone between residential and commercial land uses. It allows the City some control as far as screening, landscaping, building height and bulk restric- tions, and setback requirements. Theconditional use permit enables the City to impose specific conditions upon the developer. The Commission noted past and continuing efforts with the City's Comprehensive Plan, the Zoning Ordi ance, and specific requirements for public notification of hearings. Watten moved, Reese seconded, to continue the public hearing at the next meeting. The motion carried unanimously, 5-0. REPORTS Park Commission: Staff reported that the second Park Commission meeting in Feb- rua y was cancelled because of a legal holiday. MATTERS FROM THE FLOO Joint meeting: Bob S aw noted that he would not be able to attend the March 12th mee ing between the Council and Commissions. ADJOURNMENT Benson moved, Reese s conded, to adjourn. The motion carried unanimously and the meeting was adjourned at 8:43 p.m. Kathleen . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING CO~1MISSION MEETING TUESDAY, W~CH 15, 1983 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:30 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chairman Benson called the March 15,1983 Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:41 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Vern Watten, Janet Leslie, Mary Boyd, Bob Shaw, Bruce Benson, Frank Reese. Also Present: Council Liaison Tad Shaw, Planner Brad Nielsen, Assistant Kathy West. Absent: Commissioner Dick Spellman. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES Benson moved, Watten seconded, approval of the minutes from the March 1, 1983 Planning Commission meeting as written. The motion carried unanimously, 5-0. CONTINUATION OF MARCH 1, 1983 PUBLIC HEARING Applicant Gary Winterfield was present to request a Conditional Use Permit for an office building in an R-C, Residential Commercial Zone located at the south- west corner of State Highway 7 and Chaska Road (Old State Highway 41). Plans for the 3,800 square foot office building were approved three years earlier. Winterfield noted that he intends to use part of the building as a real estate sales office, and rent the remainder to two professional-type offices(i.e., doctor, dent- ist, attorney) as opposed to a retail use. It was noted that Winterfield had changed the site plan~~porder to minimize the need for variances (see Planner's report, Attachment #1JF- The Hearing was opened to the public and the following questions/concerns were noted: Tom Wartman, 28120 Boulder Bridge Drive, questioned the zoning on the .property to the southw~st. It was noted as residential, with no special permits. Cindy and Mike Marr, 6015 Chaska Road, asked about: _ Drainage plans, noting flooding at the site. (Drainage plans had been submitted to the City Engineer but had not been reviewed at this time.) Parking lot lighting. Winterfield noted plans for limited night-time lighting, probably not 24 hours per day, though. - Building exterior. Brick veneer was planned. - Buffer from Highway 7. It was noted that landscaping would be required, the specific plan to be finalized with the Conditional Use Permit. -t- (5Y\ H I-e- . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINTUES -2- MARCH 15, 1983 (Continued from page 1.) Cindy and Mike Marr... -Hours of operation. Planner Nielsen noted that the Ordinance limits hours of operation to be- tween 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. Pam and Doug Groskreutz, 5985 Chaska Road: Landscaping. Mrs. Groskreutz noted a desire to preserve existing trees, and questioned plans for additional landscaping. Winterfield noted that the landscape plan would depend upon the building design, i.e., if a walk-out, then timbers and rock might be used. Fencing had not been decided upon. Use of berms and a split-rail fence were dis- cussed. Traffic concerns including driveways and the amount of traffic on Chaska Road were noted. - Vlatersupply. A concern that the water used by an office building might affect local residential wells was expressed. Muriel Vogel, 19795 Excelsior Boullevard, questioned future commercial development along Highway 7, and where this proposal is in terms of processing. It was noted that only the property in question was being considered at this time, and that it had previously been rezoned Residential Commercial. The Commission explained that the Planning Commission holds the Public Hearing, makes a recommendation, then the Council reviews the proposa~ approving or denying th!l request. The public hearing was closed at 8:11 p.m. The Planning Commission discussed the proposal and raised the following points: Variances - Planner Nielsen noted that the setback variances ar~ .due (see report - Attachment #1)~o lot configuration and public rights-of-way on three sides of the lot. The border along Chaska Road (old Highway 41) was described as the narrowest width on a public street and considered the lot front. Parking Requirements - It was noted that the proposal showed the required number of parking spaces. Soil Tests and grading - Winterfield said that he had taken soil tests, the results being positive. He noted that the lot would be graded away from the building; and plans were to transfer dirt from a higher portion of the property into the parking area. Landscaping _ Winterfield stated that he would try to save as many trees as possible, noting that more trees might have to be removed if berms become part of the landscape plan. Elevation _ Winterfield noted that the elevation of the lower level floor as planned was a few feet below Chaska Road. Commissioner Watten noted that this would require more dirt against the building. He emphasized the low quality of the site, much of it below grade and under water if not filled. -* on -h\~ . .. l. PLANNING CO~TI~ISSION MINUTES -3- MARCH 15, 1983 (Continued from page 2.) Drainage _ Watten pointed out that approximately 80% of the site will be imperv- ious cove:t; and drainage onto High.-lay 7 and Chaska Road is a concern. Watten moved, Boyd seconded, to deny the request. The motion was defeated on a three to three roll oall vote. Ayes: Nays: Watten, Boyd, Reese Leslie, Shaw, Benson Watten noted that he felt the previous Residential Commercial zoning was unfor- tunate, although not an issue at this hearing. He stated that the proposed land ooverage is inappropriate to the location. Leslie noted the importance of oonsidering what to develop along Highway 7. She felt that, given the characteristios of Winterfield's plan, such as design, minimal signage, etc., the proposal is not offensive from the standpoint of commercial development on Highway 7. Watten suggested that the structure might be lowered from two stories to one, re- ducing the profile, the square footage, and the parking requirements. Reese noted that the use of the property is too intensive and the hardship for variances is not present. The Commission recessed at 8:35 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING: 23505 Smithtown Road (County Road 19) - REZONING Chairman Benson called the publio hearing to order at 8:36 p.m. by reading the legal notioe published March 2, 1983. The purpose of the hearing was to oon- sider rezoning the above mentioned property (known as the Shorewood Nursery) from R-5, Multiple Family Residential to R-C, Residential Commercial. It was explained that the rezoning had previously been' approved> by .resolution but statutes require a zoning amendment to be in ordinanoe form. Gary Minion, 23505 Smithtown Road (ShorewQod Nursery) was present. No public oomments were: made and the public hearing was closed at 8:40 p.m. Reese moved, Leslie seoonded, to recommend approval of the rezoning. The motion carried unanimously, 6-0. PUBLIC HEARING: BAYSWATER ROAD - AMESBURY - REZONING Chairman Benson called the public hearing to order at 8:42 p.m. by re.ading the legal notice published March 2, 1983. The purpose of the hearing was to con- sider rezoning property along Bayswater Road (known as Amesbury) from R-2, Single Family Residential, to P.U.R.D., Planned Unit Residential Distriot. It was explained that this property had also been previously rezoned by resolution and the public hearing was a "housekeeping" measure. It was noted that the plat had been filed and Bayswater Road was in plaoe. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 15, 1983 -4- (Continued from page 3.) Muriel Vogel, 19795 State Highway 7, raised a question regarding traffic flow. It . was noted that traffic to and from Bayswater Road goes onto Minnetonka Blvd. The public hearing was closed at 8:44 p.m. Shaw moved, Watten secorided, to recommend adoption of the proposed rezoning, The motion carried unanimously, 6-0. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING ORDINANCE AMEMDMENT Chairman Benson called the hearing to order at 8:45 p.m. by reading the legal notice as published March 2, 1983. Mr. Bruce Hubbard of Tex-sota Construction/Minnesota Mini':b'storagewas present to request that the Zoning Ordinance be amended to include self-storage facilities as a conditional permitted use in the C-1, Neighborhood Convenience Commercial District. Mr. Hubbard explained the proposed use by presenting a project designed for 19545/19585 State Highway 7. Graphics showed a series of buildings 20 to 40 feet in width. Hubbard discribed a "hacienda" or enclosure effect in the building layout with four interior buildings surrounded on three sides by an outer building. ~V~ f~nishe,d exterior will be concrete block with a painted rock face. A sixth smaller building near the entrance will serve as the resident manager's quarters. It will be finished with a residential character - brick and natural wood. Hubbard noted that a parking area would be provided at the entrance. There will be a gated security system and fencing along the open east side of the project. Security lights will be mounted below the roof line. (See Planner's report, Attachment #2fExhibit C, for layout design) Two the four interior buildings are two stories, all containing individual small storage units behind locked garage doors. The structures are of masonry walls with concrete roofs. Hubbard noted that clients are usually residents of condominium or multi-housing projects, and there is some commercial storage, generally record storage for pro- fessional firms. He indicated that studies show a market in this area. Hubbard noted a January 20th meeting with three adjoining residential property owners, the results being positive. A 1980 MnDOT traffic count and a 1975 State PCA noise study, both along Highway 7, were referenced. Hubbard noted that results (from 25,500 cars per day) of the noise study were in violation of State codes. He added that the project would serve as a noise barrier, protecting residents to the south. He noted that tree cover will be added along the south half of the property. and a berm between Highway 7 and the manager's quarters. Hubbard presented elevations showing sight lines from neighboring residences, noting that client traffic would not be seen from the houses. It was noted that drainage is to the northwest. Hubbard intends 1 to tie into the State's storm sewer system if possible. He noted that all utilities will be under- ground and existing overhead lines will be removed. Lawns will be spririkled with ~ well water and only the manager's residence will require sewer and water; the pro- ject would hook up to City sewer and water if available. If- fJn -h l..e. . .. -. PLANNING CO}lldISSION MINUTES -5- MARCH 15, 1983 The public hearing was opened to the public and the following QonceItf$/questions were raised. Muriel Vogel, 19195 Excelsior Boulevard; - tarred surfaces will add to drainage which enters storm sewers leading to her property across highway 1. She also questioned the effects of the City's wetland ordinance upon her property. Carroll Thurston, 19580 Shady Hills Road: - noted that she was interested in this type of development. She cited limited traffic as a positive point of the proposal, along with the developer's at- tention to the project. It was noted that traffic problems at the Vine Hill Road intersection would probably not be greatly impacted. Hubbard noted that the units would generate an averag61 of 10-12 cars per day and that the busiest time of the year was during warm weather. Commissioner Boyd questioned control over items stored in the units, such as chemi- cals. Hubbard explained that Mini-storage requires the clients to sign leases and dol3sltt allow storage of flamables or chemicals. He added that the units are uriheated. It was noted that there is adequate space for fire trucks and moving vans between the buil dings. The Commission questioned the number of units and the floorplan of the two sQ~ry buildings. Hubbard estimated there to be 380+ units, some with moveable walls to accommodate spacial demands. The second floor units will be accessed by a freight elevator and will have a hallway running the length of the building. It was noted that these buildings would be 20 feet in height, while the one story structures would be 11 feet high. Harry Feichtinger, 19480 Shady Hills Road: - . noted approval of the propos(;l.l but expressed concern .over the 20 foot height. He also questioned the level of the lighting on the two story buildings. Hubbard stated that the outdoor lighting would be at the 11 foot level. A question was raised as to preventing children from entering the grounds. Hubbard said that the east side of the property would be fenced and, if necessary, a low area of the roof at the southwest corner of the project could be fenced also. There being no further comments from the audience, the public hearing was closed at 9:46 p.m. The Commission discussed the type of zone which self-storage facilities fit into in other communities. Industrial was noted anmmber of times. Mr Hubbard responded to the following issues raised by the eommission: Hours of operation: Daily - gates open from 1:30 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. office open from 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Vandalism: It has not been much of a problem at other units, occasional break-ins. Resident managers alleviate many problems. Light s : An electric eye is used - on at dusk, off at dawn. 100 watt mercuries are the type of lights used. ~ . . . PLAlmING COMMISSION MINUTES -6- MARCH 15, 1983 Signage : White background with Minnesota Mini-storage in red and black letters, and the logo, internally lit. Commissioner Watten raised the concern that the use is of an industrial nature and that the massive scale of the buildings would be an intrusion into a residential neighborhood. It was noted that there was no district in the Zoning Ordinance where the use fit. The C-1, Neighborhood Convenience Commercial District seemed most appropriate to amend. The R-C, Residential Commercial District had been considered but it was agreed that it should remain quite limited. It vJas also noted that the proposal is within the site coverage limitations of the zone. The Commission discussed whether or not the self-storage facilities are a neighborhood convenience. Hubbard noted that the usual market area has a four mile limitation. Reese agreed that the scale of the structure is industrial but noted that proper landscaping could break up the visual mass. The Commission also discussed the exterior surface mfthe proposed structures. It was noted that the commercial zones have no exterior building requirements, but as a conditional use, it can be required that the building surface match that in the neighborhood. The zoning around the project was noted as R-1, Single Family Residential to the south, west and north, and C-3, General Commercial to the east. Zoning along Highway 7 was discussed in general, as was property in the City which is currently zoned C-1 . \iatten moved, Reese Seconded, "(;0 recommend that the Council deny the request to amend the C-1 District of the Shorewood Zoning Ordinance to include self-storage facilities as a conditional permitted use in the C-1, Neighborhood Convenience Commercial Dis.... trict. The motion was defeated on a roll call vote, 3 to 3. ayes: Watten, Boyd, Reese nays: Leslie, Shaw, Benson (See continuation of discussio~ following the next public hearing, page 7) PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING REQUEST (19585 State Highway 7) Chairman Benson called the public hearing to order at 10:25 p.m. by reading the legal notice as published on March 2, 1983. The request was to conaider rezoning property located at the above address from R-1, Single Family Residential to C-1, Neighborhood Convenience Commercial District. It was noted that this public hearing was related to the previous request to amend the C-1 District. Neighbors noted that they liked Mr. Hubbard's project. They expressed concern that the property might be rezoned commercial and developed as something less desirable than the proposed self-storage facilities. The public hearing was closed at 10:33 p.m. Leslie moved, Benson seconded, to table the rezoning request until the City Council reaches a decision on the request to amend the C-1 District to include self-storage facilities. The motion carried, 5",,1~ on a 'roll call vote. ayes: Leslie, Boyd, Shaw, Benson, Reese. nays: Watten. PLA}rnING CO~~aISSION MINUTES -7- MARCH 1 5, 1 983 . CONTINUATION OF DISCUSSION - ZONING ORDINANCE AMENTIDENT (Pages 4 through 6) Councilwoman Haugen requested reasons for the Planning COmmission's vote on the motion to recommend that the Council deny the request to amend the Shorewood Zoning Ordinance to include self-storage facilities as a conditional permitted use in the C-1 District. The Commission responded as follows: Leslie: Against denial: Type of development on HighvJay 7 needs to be carefully considered. Developer is attempting to minimize the negative impact of the "wall" (building) Neighborhood is satisfied with proposal. Given limitations of the Vine Hill intersection, the proposal seems to be about the best possi bie for this property. Reese: For denial: - Based upon the new zoning ordinance, and not upon the proposal itself, the conditional use was incompatible with the ordinance. Boyd: For denial: The concept of the proposal was okay, however the massive area of the buildings and their impact was negative. Benson: Against denial: - Found it a livable proposal, low impact. - There was minimum amount of traffic impact on the Vine Hill intersection. - Land uses other than residential need to be considered along Highway 7. Proposal creates a noise barrier. wattefi: For denial: Intr1l!.s-ion ot'structure into the neighborhood. Massive and inappropriate. - Traffic generated can't be compared \"lith a residential development of 12-14 people Philosophically, in terms of vitality, the proposal is not represnmtative of this community. Development along Highway 7 needs to be compared with Highway 12 (relaxing compared to industry, fences, commercial development). Shaw: Against denial: This portion of Highway 7 is commercial rather than residential. - The use is a better transition from residential neighborhoods than some other possibilities. - Unrealistic to expect low density residential. - Not a bad use. - Low traffic impact. - The project can be dressed up to lessen the impact. - The difficulty of writing an ordinance to include all possible uses. . . REPORTS: City Council: Councilwoman Haugan reported from the March 14th Council meeting, noting the following actions: . reviewed a proposed ordinance regulating moving buildings reviewed the Cross Marina leaseagreem~nt revievJed a letter by Mr. Hunner's atto;rney regarding his variance request discussed union negotiations and salary adjustments - noted a newspaper error regarding the Naegele sign; voted against Naegele's proposed 10 year agreement, noted a counter offer of 3 years before removal. . . . PLANNING COT-'lMISSION IHNUTES -8- MARCH 15, 1983 Park Commission: Staff reported from the March 7th meeting, noting that the Park Commission was sta.rting a donations campaign for play equipment, and had asked former Mayor Steve Frazier to organize a community picnic this sum- mer. ADJOURNMENT Shaw moved, Benson seconded, to adjourn. The motion carried unanimously and the meeting was adjourned at approximately 10:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, 1(~vJUV~ Kathleen West, Planning Commission Secretary . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION ~EETING TUESDAY, APRIL 5, 1983 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:30 P.M. M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER Chairman Bensdn call~d the April 5, 1983 Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:42 p.m. I ROLL CALL i i Present: Commission~rs Richard Spellman (late), Mary Boyd, Bob Shaw, Bruce Benson, Vern Watte*. Council Liaison Tad Shaw, Planner Brad Nielsen, Secretary Kathy WestJ Absent: Commission~rs Janet Leslie (prior commitment), Frank Reese (prior com- mitment). i I APPROVAL OF THE MINUtES I Benson moved, Boyd s~conded, to table approval of the mintues. The motion car- ried unanimously, 4-0. i , PUBLIC HEARING: OAK I RIDGE ESTATES 3rd ADDITION Chairman Benson call~d the public hearing to order at 7:43 p.m. by reading the I legal notice as publtshed March 23, 1983. Ted Noble and Joe Gorecki were present to answer any questi~ns regardin& the request for preliminary plat approval of Oak Ridge Estates 3r~ Addition; lithe first phase cf... nsists of dividing eight lots for sale or developmfnt. . I I I i Mr. Gorecki noted th~t the ~al meets all zonipg requirements and nolvariances were being requestedf The ~easure 40,000 sq are feet or larger. William Barrett, 264~5 Oak ICircle, asked ab ut drainage and questiQned the dirt piled in the area. ! i i Gorecki explaned t~at the dir Ihad been excavat d to lay the sewer, bui was of such poor quality that differ +t soil was broug t in for the road bed. I He noted that drainage is planned to f qw east to the cr ek, and west to the cui-de-sac. ! : Alan Yelsey, 5485 Grant Lorenz tad, questioned plans for future development of the area. The Comprehensive Plan as referenced, suggested development is low density res dential. Harlan Koehnen, Excelsior, disc ~sed his interest in plans to combine developable properties together for the p fPose of coordinating roads, utilities, etc. There being no additional comme ts, the public hearing was closed at 8:01 p.m. The Plannin&.vCommission reviewed items from the City Engineer's report (see At- tachment #1:rr 1) Street Name - It was noted that the entire road should be named either Noble Road or Eastgate Circle. Gorecki noted a preference for Noble Road. The Planner suggested that the legalities of cHanging the street name should be considered. 2) Sanitary Sewer - A concern over questionable soils was noted along with the ~ on Pi Ie . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -2- APRIL 5, 1983 need for additional soil borings. A difference in engineering opinions was discussed. 3) Drainage and Storm Sewer - It was noted that drainage from the cul-de-sac would be channeled along an easement between lots 4 and 5. 4) Water - Gorecki stated that individual wells are planned for the development, noting that acentral well was not feasible from a cost standpoint. 5) Street Design and Construction - The Commission agreed that the street must be up tq City standards~ Field inspection reports were discussed. Planner Nielsdn summarized his report (Attachment #2~as to the~roposal's compli- ance with Cit~ Codes and Ordinances; design requirements; grad'ng, utilities and drainage; ph~sing; and wetlands. Staff noted that the Park Co mission had re- viewed theproRosal in terms of park dedication fees, recommending that the Council accept cash r4ther than land. Commissioner Watten questioned the lot width at the cul-de-sac. Nielsen noted that the width was adequate. Watten moved, Spellm~n seconded, to recommend that the Council approve the Oak Ridge Estates 3rd Addition preliminary plat subject to the conditions set forth in the City Engineer's report. The motion carried unarimously, 5-0. REQUEST FOR VARIANCE: MINNETONKA STATE BANK Bob McDougal representEd Minnetonka State Bank in requesting a variance to install signs in excess of the size requirements of the Shorewood Zoning Ordinance for tge new Bank located at 23 80 State Highway 7 (see Planner's report, Attachment #3)~ McDougal noted that thE Bank was requesting three signs: #1) Double-faced FrEestanding - (see Planner's report, Exhibit A) Located 10 to 15 feet from bu lding front. Faces east and west, showing the bank name and logo, and tIe time and temperature (not flashing). Sign is 81 square feet in area (e, ch side), approximately 13 x 6.5 feet in length and height. The sign stands 19.4 feet from ground to top. #2) Bank Front (see Planner's report, Exhibit B) - Shows bank name and logo. 18 square feet n area. Capital letters are 1 foot in height. Sign pro- jects 1 inch fre m the building. . Made of ~ inch anodized aluminum with an earthtone dec( r Solid letters:i #3) East Side (seE lanner's report, Exhibit C) - Same sign as #2. The Planner's recommEnl ation to minimize variances and suggestion to exchange one wall sign for an add e s identification were noted. McDougal noted that name. He felt the p not being gaudy or e hI size variances were necessary because of the long bank o osed signs conform to the intent of the Zoning Ordinance, c ssive. The Commission quest 0 ed whether or not the freestanding sign should be considered multi-faced. Multi- al ed was described as more than two faces. Shaw moved, Boyd sec( n ed, to recommend that the Council grant the request for vari- ance. Commissioner Watten d ised caution in granting sign variances. The motion carried 3 t 2 on a roll call vote. Ayes: Nays: Spellman, Ben 0 . Boyd, Shaw, Watten. ~ 611 ~ I.e.-- . . . PLANNING COMMI SION MIN TES -3- APRIL 5, 1983 REQUEST FOR VARIANCE: ANIEL RANDALL Mr. Randall was present leave an existing house one existing lot. The It was noted that the Z on a lot at a time, thu Spellman moved, Watten request conditioned upo to request a recommendation to allow him to temporarily during the construction of a new residential dwelling on roperty in question is located at 24655 Smithtown Road. ning Ordinance states that only one structure is allowed requiring a variance. (See report, Attachment #4.)~ econded, to recommend that the Council grant the var~ance a 180 day time limit. The motion carried unan'mously, 5-0. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR Commission members sugg sted further study of the multi-faced sign question. REPQRTS: Chairman Benson noted t at he would be absent from the April 19th meeting. Bob Shaw agreed to chair th meeting. Park Commission: Staff noted the Commission's review of the Oak Ridge Estates 2nd Addition p eliminary plat, along with an evaluation of the 1982}83 ice skating pr gram. City Council: Liaison Winterfield Co the Commission haw reported from the March 28th meeting, noting ditional Use Permit request had been passed, and of upcoming Zoning Ordinance study sessions. ADJOURNMENT that the remtnded Watten moved, Benson se onded, to adjourn. The motion carried unanimously and the meeting was adjourn d at 9:18 p.m. Respectfully submitted, 7(~ Kathleen West, Planning Secretary T tn) -h I-e.. . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, APRIL 19, 1983 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:30 P.M. M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER Acting Chairman Shaw called the April 19th Planning Comission meeting to order at 7:43 P.M. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Richard Spellman (late), Mary Boyd, Bob Shaw, Frank Reese, Vern Watten, Janet Leslie; Council Liaison Tad Shaw; City Planner Brad Nielsen; Assistant Kathy West. Absent: Commission Chairman Bruce Benson (out of town). APROVAL OF THE MINUTES March 15, 1983: Leslie moved, Boyd seconded, to approve the Minutes as written. The motion carried unanimously, 5-0. April 5, 1983: Watten moved, Boyd seconded, to approve the minutes as witten. The motion carried unanimously, 5-0. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST TO REZONE Acting Chairman Shaw called the public hearing to order at 7:43 p.m. by reading the legal notice as published April 6, 1983. The hearing was to consider a request to rezone property located at 5620 County Road 19 from R-2 (Single Family Residential District) and C-3 (General Commercial District) to P.U.D. (Planned Unit Development District). Mr. Scott Harri of Schoell and Madson, Inc. was present to speak for the developers, Tingewood, Inc. Mr. Adrian Johnson of Tingewood was also present. Mr. Harri noted that the applicants were seeking concept approval for their pro~ posal to develop a 39 unit condominium on the site. Mr. Harri described the loca- tion of the property, surrounding land uses, and zoning. He noted that the property in question contains approximately 5.5 acres and is zoned both commercial and resi- dential. The development is planned for the east one third of the property (zoned C-3) along the County Road 19 corridor. The rest of the property will be retained as open space (86%), developing only a holding pond area and a pedestrian trail. Harri explained that the applicants are requesting to rezone the property to a P.U.D., except for. a small lot containing the existing house,- which will remain C-3. Hard described the property as somewhat dish shaped andnbted that the land drains to approximately the center, then north. Access is planned from County Road 19. The proposed driveway entrance is opposite the existing shopping center entrance and the drive curves along the north edge of the property leading to surface and underground parking. It was noted that there will be 42 underground and 30 surface stalls, exceeding the Ordinance requirement for 70 spaces. Harri noted that they intend to remodel the house for office space, expanding from 960 to 3000 square feet. He added that the building design would be altered to be compatable with the condominiums. Parking would be shared through cross easements with the condos. Utilities exist along the east side of County Road 19. Water is available from a 12" main, and gravity sewer service can be provided for both the office and condos. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 19, 1983 -2- The condominium project will contain the following units: No. of Units & Bedrooms Anticipated Cost Square Footage 1100 sq. ft. 925 sq. ft. 750 sq. ft. upper mid start $90,000's $80,000's $70,000's 6 two plus bedroom units 21 one plus bedroom units 12 one bedroom units The units will be owner occupied and governed by association bylaws. It is proposed that there will. be a restrictive covenant prohibiting storilge of recreational vehi- cles of any sort in the surface parking area. Potential buyers are seen as "empty nesters" or young professionals with few children. Harri noted that they would like to start construction in the fall of 1983 and com- plete the project in the summer of 1984. The following questions, comments, conCernS\Mere raised by the public: Winnie Lush, Chairwoman of the Board for the Lake Fellowship of Unitarians, 24575 Glen Road, rioted concern over the pond location, the cost of the pond, dr~inage plans: Harri noted that they are very hopef41 that the pond will take care of additional runoff created by the developmentl ~A dike will be built across the north side of the pond and the flow will be meter~d and controlled. Area drainage problems were noted. Harri stated that the cost of all improvements made on the site for the proposal will be born by the developer. Future development of R-2 property: Harri explained that he had made reference to potential development of surrounding properties not controlled by Tingewood. Request for additional buffering: ijarri noted that little bufferin~ was planned as two thirds of the property (withitree cover) will be left undeveloped. Woody Love, 5570 Shorewood Lane, (als~ with the Lake Fellowship) noted that he was impressed with the basic layout of rhe proposal. He expressed two concerns: 1) Problems with snowmobiles and mo~orcycles driving through the area: Harri noted that restricted R.V~ parking should limit the number of vehicles, and motorized traffic would be prohibited from the open back area by the associa- tion bylaws. 2) Drainage problems and the effect on the Lake fellowship's pond: Harri reiterated their hope to.trap runoff from their development. He added that the.holdfug'pondshotil'd reduce the tate of runoff but would not eliminate the total volume of water draining through the area. Joseph Finley, 1200 National City Bank, (an attorney speaking for James Borchart, property owner to the north of the property in question) asked. about a possible buffer along the driveway to protect Mr. Borchart from condo traffic/headlights: Harri noted that they would consider a combination of plantings, berms or small fences as a buffer. Ownership of the property: It was noted that the developer has a contract for deed. How were density figures reached?: Harri noted that 39 units were economically feasible for the price range they were planning. He cited the Shorewood Compre- hensive plan, the Zoning and P.U.D. Ordinances. He suggested that the proposed number of units was less than the maximum allowed if they were to combine the . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 19, 1983 -3- densities allowed und~r the existing zoning. It was pointed out that R-5 density would allow 12.5 unit$ per acre, where this proposal equals a density of about 6.99 units per acre. The density is not specified in the C-3 zone. R-4 zoning would allow approxima~ely 6 to 7 units per acre. R-2 would be 2 units per acre. Harri also noted topographical and site considerations, along with the market analysis, as factors in determining the density. James Borchart, 5580 County Road 19, noted that he understood that current zoning required 50 foot setbacks from his property. Mr. Harri explained that the pro- posal meets the setback requirementsifor the P.U.D. Ordinance. It was noted that this is not a commerc~al development, which would require 50 foot setbacks. The proposed condominium is 30 feet from the property line. Mr. Borchart pointed out that the driveway is set back only 5 feet. The possibility of rotating the build- ing was discussed but! topographical constraints were noted. Borchart expressed concerns over privacy! and possible traffic problems along the drive. Tom Story, 24845 Glen Road, re-emphasized drainage problems in the area, accumulated from years of development. He expressed concern over the potential cost to all of the property owners if a storm sewer system is installed. He questioned whether the proposed holding pond would do anything but add to the problems. Bob Gagne, 24850 Amlee Road, questioned whether there had been any thoughts as to coordinating drainageiwith the adjacent property to the north. He stated that he liked the openness Ofi the back area and he brought up the types of possible devel- opment under the current zoning as opposed to the P.U.D. Mr. Harri noted that professional type off~ce space was planned for the remodelled house. In reference to drainilge, it was noted that the City Engineer had warned that expecting the propose~ holding pond to help alleviate area problems was optbmistic; not contributing to tpe problem seemed a more realistic expectation. John Cross, 24250 Smithtown Road, noted that he was not affected by the project, but thought it was a nice proposal, citing the fairly low density compared to many multiple family complexes. He suggested a need for additional buffering. Wilene Reid, 24680 Smithtown Road, noted that the proposal was nicely put together. She was concerned that storm sewers might be required and that the neighboring property owners would! be assessed. She also questioned the effects of additional traffic at the County! Road 19/5mithtown intersection, and the possibility of traf- fic lights at this intersection. Mr. Harri noted that a commercial development would generate possib~y five times as much traffic as the proposed development. Alex Reid, Sr., 24650 S~ithtown Road, questioned future development of property to the west. Mr. Harri ~larified previous statements, noting that the west portion of the property in qu~stion would not be developed, and that properties surround- ing this one are zoneo R-2 and could potentially be developed at some time in the . future. Mr. Reid also asked H an object of the holding pond was recreational. Mr. Harri explained that it wou~d serve bo~h as drainage, control and as an amenity to the site. No Fences are proposed arbund the property and the trail system was ~escribed as a footpath. Mr. Reid noted concerns over additional dogs in the area and the cost of drainage solutions. Jan Wells, 24695 Glen Rbad, reiter~ted the drainage and water problems they experi- ence each spring. She suggeste~ that the problems be solved before building. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -4- APRIL 19, 1983 Dave Littlefield, 24775 Glen Road, commented that he supports James Borchart's concern as to the short setback. He noted that the three story ediface is a gross intrusion. He felt both the density and the building are out of place for the area, and inappropriate for this environment. Mr. Harri noted that the first f~oor level of the condominium (parking beneath this level) is 11 or 12 feet below County Road imposing. The mature stand of e~ergreens near buffer and additional landscapin~ is planned. act as a site line buffer. 19, making the building seem less the road will be maintained as a The existing house should also There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed at 8:50 p.m. The Planning Commission recessed until 9:08 p.m. The~G!ty Planner reviewed items in his report dated 15 April 1983 (see Attachment #1)1<emphasizing the following: The report concentrated on the basic issue of land use - what could occur given the current zoning as compared with what is being proposed. 1) Si~e Imp9St - The east one third of the site could be8crlo covered under current commercial zoning, where the. proppsed project covers orjly14..4% of the total site. It was noted that the po"nding ar~a is not the solution to the area drainage problem, although it presumably will take care of runoff from the project. 2) Traffic - The proposal should generate considerably less traffic than a commercial development. The intersection was noted as a problem for the City, the County and possibly Tonka Bay also. 3) Parks - The Park Commission will review the project. 4) Tax Base - Nielsen noted that this section should be ignored. 5) Elimination of Commercial Land - The proposal does create multiple family housing area which is in shorter supply. than commercial land. Density - In considering the Com~rehensive Plan and the existing zoning, the proposal is consistent. Site Design - The impact on the h~use to the 'north should be considered further. Landscaping can be added as a buffer. Although the proposal meets the P.U.D. standards, the issue of setbacks tn the commercial zone versus the P.U.D. is raised for considerati6n; Planning Commissioners individually reviewed the proposal. , Commissioner Leslie questioned the remodelling of the existing house. Mr. Harri noted that the structure would beialtered but not expanded. The additional square footage would come from co~verting the garage, basement, the first and second floors into usable space. He explained that the existing bituminous sur- face from the garage to County Road 19 would be eliminated and the area land- scaped. Access would be from the!rear (west) as would parking. Leslie asked for a review on the ~riveway placement. Harri responded that the office and condos would be using ~ne drive which will be located directly across from the west entrance to the sho~ping center, 40 feet north of the existing driveway. Leslie questioned plans for the 3~ foot setback area 6ear Mr. Borchart's property. Harri noted that they had planned, to sod and landscape. The area had not been considered in deta-iil but Harri noted that they would work with Mr. Borchart. He added that the building would be dressed in stonework and plantings were planned along the corners. 1- on f-r"I-c... . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -5- APRIL 19, 1983 Leslie asked about communication with surrounding property owners to the north and west. It was noted that the land to the west is vacant, the closest house being approximately 300 feet. There had been no direct communication. Commissioner Reese asked about the future of the land to the west. Alex Reid, Jr. noted that his father and he had about three acres, and might consider developing it at some time. Reese questioned the size of the area the holding pond would handle: Harri noted that it had not been studied in detail. Reese also asked about the parking requirements for the office. Harri explained that they had used Ithe Ordinance requirement of 1 stall per 200 square feet, or 15 stalls. 61 spaces are reserved for the condominiums, one and one half per unit being the orditance requirement. Commissioner Boyd qUe~stioned the grading and slope of the drive and parking lot. Mr. Harri explained that drainage would be directed south from the parking lot and then piped to t e pond. Boyd asked if therel was any way to change the entrance to the building,. or shift the _ buildi~~. Harrli noted t~at the impact upo~ Mr. Borchart' s property had not beenrecognlzed"and,.that changes-could beconsldered. Commissioner spellmanl also suggested that the developers consider rotating or re- positioning the bUi~ding to allow more green area to the north. He asked if the developers Planned~!to dedicated the open space to the City for parkland. Mr. Harri noted that th y wished to preserve this portion of the property as open space for the devell pment. Spellman qUestioned~the location of the pond outlet. Mr. Harri said the exact location had not be n determined, but that they planned to follow natural drain- age channels. I Spellman warned thel' developer of possible future problems which might result from the cross parking elsements between the condos and the office building. Commissioner Watten npted that he thought the proposal was generous in allowing the. open green area to ~emain. He also reiterated the thought that the impact of the residential develoPfnent would pr'obably be less than a commercial development. Watten suggested th~t the position of the condominium relative to Mr. Borchart's property could be r~configured or revolved to provide a more direct access into the basement parkin~ area. He noted that the three story building, plus the gabled roof, would ~robably appear as two plus stories from the road, given the differing elevationst It was noted that the building would have a substantial impact upon the Mr. Borchart's residence. Watten suggested that the developer might consider redu, ing or stepping down the north wing of the building to lessen the impact. The lobation and total number of parking spaces were also discussed. ! Commissioner Shaw not11ed that the number of units is high. He thought Watten' s idea to step down the north end of the condominium might reduce the density and the visual impact. Shaw asked for clarlif ica t ion of the number of storie s . Ha rri exp 1 a ined that there are three stories abEve the underground parking area. He noted that it would ap- pear as a split entiry with windows approximately every 50 feet along the west, the garage level not vilsible from the east. Shaw noted that a great deal of redesigl;! . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 19, 1983 -6- work will be required to direct the parking lot drainage to the south. Shaw noted that in the development stage of the P.U.D. process, attention should be given to the dedication of the western portion of the property as park or park-type land to preclude future development. He saw it as concept- ually a good plan but suggested buffering to the south, and north along Mr. Borchart's property. He also noted the need for area drainage plans. Watten moved, Spellman seconded, to recommend that the Council grant concept approval of the proposal. It was noted that conceptually the project itself, the site and the use of the land are within the meaning of the P.U.D. Ordinance, and consistent with what the Planning Commission would like to see developed in this area. Watten!moved, Spellman seconded, to amend the original motion to be subject to the fo~lowing concerns: 1. Storm water runoff problems be addressed. 2. Intrusion upon Mr. Borchart's residence/property be considered. 3. Traffic access to County Road 19 be addressed. 4. Park Commission review of the proposal. 5. Review and recommendation by the City Engineer. 6. The ~rticles of incorporation and bylaws be addressed at the develop- ment Istage. The motion to amend the motion carried unanimously, 6-0, on a voice vote. The amended motion (to recommend concept stage approval subject to the enumerated items), carried unanimously, 6-0, on a voice vote. REQUEST FOR SETBACK VARIANCE Mr. and Mrs. Donald Wambold were present to request a variance to allow them to remodel an existing house located at 28015 Woodside Road. The house was described as a nonconforming structure. The Wambolds noted that the house was built prior to adoption of the setback requirements in the current Zoning Ordinance. Letters from the Wambolds and their realtors were referenced to cite the inadequacies of the house and its unsaleability (see Planners report dated 17 April 1983, attach- ment #2)~ Mrs. Wambold explained that they planned to extend the house 23 feet to the west, adding bedrooms and an, entry (requiring a setback variance of 30.5 to 35 feet) and additions of a kitchen, deck and gazebo to the east and south (requiring a 10 to 14 foot variance). Mr. Wambold noted that placement of the additions is limited due to the location of the existing pool and trees. Commissioners Reese and Leslie noted a valid hardship. They commented that the additions would not negatively impact the neighborhood or green space. Commissioner Watten noted that the saleability of the"house was not an item for the Commission to address. It was noted that the structure is nonconfofming and the additions would expand the I - nonconformity. Joe Gorecki, 26890 Edgewood Road, felt that the additions to the home would improve the area and would harmonize with the neighborhood. * un {I/ e- . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 19, 1983 -7- The Commission questioned whether other homes in the area meet the setback require- ments. It was noted that some do, others do not. Watten moved, Leslie seconded, to recommend that the Council approve the request for variances. The motion carried unanimously, 6-0. REPORTS City Council: Councilman Tad Shaw reported on the progress of the special zoning ordinance study sessions; noted that variance requests by Randall and Minnetonka State Bank were approved; the Oak Ridge Estates preliminary plat was approved; the request to amend the C-1 Zone to include self-storage facilities will come back to the Council; the ordinance regulating moving of buildings was under re- view; and spring clean-up was discussed. ADJOURNMENT Leslie moved, Shaw seconded, to adjourn. The motion carried unanimously, 6-0, and the meeting was adjourned at 10:28 p.m. Respectfully submitted, '1(~ -W~ Kathleen West, Secretary . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, MAY 3, 1983 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:30 P.M. M I N'U T E S CALL TO ORDER Chairman Benson called the May 3rd meeting of the Planning Commission to order at approximately 7:37 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Mary Boyd, Bob Shaw, Bruce Benson, Frank Reese, Janet Leslie, Richard Spellman; Planner Brad Nielsen; Secretary Kathy West. Absent: Commissioner Vern Watten; Council Liaison Tad Shaw (prior commitment) SIMPLE SUBDIVISION - DeMALIGNON his request to split a lot, located He presented a survey of the prop~ Mr~Dbugl~s DeMalignon was present to discuss at 5935 Country Club Roa~~into two parcels. erty (see Attachment #1)~ The Planning Commission discussed the issue of additional road right-of-way dedi- cation as outlined in the City Planner's report (see Attachment #2)1( Mr. DeMalignon was concerned that the 33 foot dedication might affect the value of his property, or reduce the square footage making the proposed lots non~conform- ing. It was noted that according to the new survey, there would be adequate square footage for two lots over 40,000 square feet and the 33 foot right-of- way dedication, requiring no variances. Reese moved, Spellman seconded, to recommend that the Council grant the request for simple division of this property into two lots, neither of which is less than 40,000 sqaure feet, and to ask for a 33 foot right of way on the street side of the properties. The motion carried unanimously, 6-0. SIMPLE SUBDIVISION - SCHERBING Mr. Duane Scherbing was present to request a simple subdivision of his property located at 5865 Minnetonka Drive. The Planning Comm~sion noted that no variances were required (see Planner's report, Attachment #3~ Spellman moved, Boyd seconded, to recommend that the Council approve the simple subdivision request. The motion carried unanimously, 6-0. REQUEST FOR GARAGE VARIANCE - LARSON (Agenda was rearranged) Jim Johnson, current owner of the property located at 26420 Oak Ridge Circle, was present to discuss the request. Applicant Floyd Larson (purchaser) was not pres- ent. It was noted that Larson had applied to construct a~additional garage in order to store a mobile home and boat (see Attachment #4)~ Johnson noted that they had polled the neighbors, seven of eleven preferred a garage to outdoor storage of the recreational vehicles. The proposed garage was described as 40 by 26 feet, with the ridge not exceeding 15 feet. ~ IJ7) -H I~ . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -2- MAY 3, 1983 Planner Nielsen explained that the existing structure contains two garage spaces totalling 620 feet. The proposed detached accessory building would add 1040 square feet. The lot contains approximately 42,000 square feet, including 12,113 square feet of the ponding area. The footprint of the existing house is 1560 square feet in area, excluding the garage space. The total amount of accessory space, with the proposed garage, is 1664 square feet. Nielsen noted that the structure requires a variance to the existing Zoning Ordi- nance, which allows a total of three garage spaces. He added that it does conform to the formula in the proposed ordinance, which states that the total accessory space cannot exceed 1) the gross floor area of the principal structure, or 2) 10% of the total lot area. Nielsen suggested that if the City is inclined to grant the variance, the follow- ing cond:::O::r::::~: ::o:::l::::interf... with .x..t.ngdr'ina~e. The driveway must be at le~st five feet from the proper y line. Landscaping should be provided subject to City review a d approval. Consider decreasing the'size tD the same size as the pr ncipal structure's "footprint". 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. . 6. . The accessory structure should be of materials and desi n similar to the principal structure. j The applicant must be made fully aware that home occupa i.on are currently prohibited. Jim Reuter, 26320 Oak Ridge Circle, expressed concern over the VISU the proposed building and lost view of the pond to the rear of the back distances for the garage and the drive were discussed. Helnot would rather see the recreatio,nal vehicles than the permanen,t sfruc ure. Bill Barrett, 26445 Oak Ridge Circle, asked to see sketches of the stated that it seemed the proposal was being rushed through.Hr' no are not many trees on the lots and added that the garage might e 1 houses in the area. The Commission discussed the need for more sketches, plans and ~etails in order to make a recommendation. I Shaw moved, Leslie seconded, to send the proposal to the council with no recom- mendation because of the lack of information. After further di cussion, Shaw withdrew the motion and moved to recommend denial of the reques~. Spellman sec- onded the motion. After further discussion, Shaw withdrew the motion to deny, and moved to send the proposal to the Council with no recommendation. Leslie seconde. The motion car- ried, 5-1, Spellman opposed. I REQUEST FOR GARAGE VARIANCE - FAYFIELD, ROBERT (6005 Christmas take Road) Reese moved, Leslie seconded, to send the request to the CO~i~ without a recom- mendation as there was no representation {see Attachment #5)' I limpact of ots. The set- d that he arage. He edthat there rger than some The motion carried unanimously, 6-0. t~ !~ . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MAY 3, 1983 -3- MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR The Commission discussed the need to review and possibly change the proposed Zoning Ordinance as it relates to information provided for variance requests, grounds for granting variances, the formula for allowing and limiting acces- ory structures, connecting the accessory structure to the primary structure, the effects upon neighboring property owners, requirements for visually inconspic- uous structures. REPORTS Park Commission: Staff reported that the Commission reviewed the Shorewood Condominium project, recommending a cash rather than land dedication.. The Commission continued their visits to the City Parks with the Public Works Dir- ector and the City Administrator to discuss maintenance and improvements. City Council: Mayor Rascop reported from the April 25th meeting, noting that the Wambold variance had been granted. The request to amend the C-1 zone to include self-storage facilities will come before the Council again. The next zoning ordinance study session will be Thursday, May 12th. ADJOURNMENT Reese moved, Spellman seconded, to adjourn. The motion carried unanimously and the meeting was closed at 8:56 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~VV~ Kathleen West, Secretary . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, MAY 17, 1983 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:30 P.M. M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER Chairman Benson called the May 17th Planning Commission meeting to order at 7: 35 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Bob Shaw, Bruce Benson, Frank Reese, Janet Les 1 ie (late), Richard Spellman, Mary Boyd; Council Liaison Tad Shaw; Planner Brad Nielsen; Secretary Kathy West. Absent: Commissioner Vern Watten, business commitment APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES April 19, 1983: Boyd moved, Spellman seconded, to approve the minutes as written. The motion carried unanimously, 5-0. (Leslie arrived) May 3, 1983: A typographical error was jnoted in paragraph three, page one, under SIMPLE SUBDIVISION - DeMAUIGNON. Shaw moved, Benson seconded, to approve the minutes as conrected. The motion carried unanimously, 6-0. PUBLIC HEARING - JOHNSEN REZONING REQUEST, SIMPLE SUBDIVISION - 6055 LAKE LINDEN DR. I Chairman Benson called the public hearing to order at 7:44 p.m. by reading the legal notice as published May 4, 1983. Harold Johnsen was present. Planner Nielsen ex- plained the request to rezone and split property located at 6055 Lake Linden Drive (see Planner's report, at tachment #1 *- Engineer's Report, At tachment #2lii I twas noted that Johnsen had first requested to split the 51,000 square foot parcel into three lots, onewith the existing house and two small lots to the south, requiring a variance. In reviewing the request the City Staff suggested that additional road right-of-way be acquired along Lake Linden Drive to straighten the road. As a re- sult of this Mr. Johnsen decided to split the parcel into two lots, one with the existing house and the second with 21,000 square feet. Johnsencouldhavel requested R-3 zoning to Qllow construction of a double, but because of the r.o.w. acquisition, the Staff noted that the size of the south lot would have been too small for adb~ble and suggested R-4 zoning. Nielsen noted that there was some flexibility as to the location of the dividing line. Under the prop6se,d zoning the required setback from the existing garage would be 25 feet. It was noted that the proposed rezoning was considered appropriate from a land use perspective given the surrounding land uses. Mr. Johnsen questioned the 3:1 slope easement along the r.o.w. as outlined in the Engineer's report. He expressed concern that the existing tree buffer would be removed. It was noted that the slope was necessary for proper ~ight lines but Mr. Johnsen would be allowed to replant on the easement. A question as to whether it would be possible to save some o.f the..tr~es 'wa.s raised. Commissioner Shaw questioned tHe access/egress'point'~o,r the south lot. It was sug- gested that this be via the cross street and not directly onto Lake Linden Drive. Johnsen added that a driveway already exists. -t on +; Ie . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MAY 17, 1983 PAGE TWO Commissioner Reese questioned whether the setback restrictions on the south lot would allow building. It was noted that the R-4 requirements were less restrictive in terms of setbacks. Reese also suggested that some of the trees along the road might be saved by constructing retaining walls. There being no further comments from the public, he hearing was closed at 7:35 p.m. Reese moved, Leslie seconded, to recommend to the Council approval of the rezoning as requested. The .motion carried unanimously, 6- . Reese moved, Spellman seconded, to recommend to t e Council approval of the simple subdivision with the following suggestions: 1) That the division occur as close to 25 feet south of the garage as possible in order to make the south lot as large as possible. 2) That future work on Lake Linden Dri e take into consideration the use of some type of retaining walls to inimize the loss of trees on the lots in question. 3) That the additional right-of-way be platted at this time for future road improvements. The motion carried unanimously, 6-0. PUBLIC HEARING - REZONE TO P.U.R.D. (Boulder Brid e) Chairman Benson called the public hearing to orde at 7:57 p.m. by reading the legal notice as published May 4, 1983. Staff explained that the property, located at approximately 28000 Smithtown Road, had been rezoned and the project approved previously by resolution rather than ordinance. The hearing was scheduled in order to amend the Shorewood Zoning Ordinance and map. There being no comment from the public, the hearing was closed at 8:00 p.m. Shaw moved, Benson seconded, to recommend that the Council adopt the rezoning by ordi~ nance. The motion carried unanimously, 6-0. PUBLIC HEARING - BOULDER BRIDGE OUTLOT E - PRELIMINARY PLAT, REQUEST FOR VARIANCE Chairman Benson called the public hearing to order by reading the legal notice as published May 4, 1983. (See Attachment #3~Planner's report.) Tom Wartman was present to explain the proposal. He noted that the original plans for Outlot E, showing a loop road, had been changed after studying the topography. The road now has a horseshoe configuration. The number of lots remain: the same, 19, all meeting the minimum square footage requirements. He added that the alter- ations fit the contours better, there will be less asphalt, but some grading will still be necessary. The proposal includes plans to move the existing pond 40 to 50 feet back from Howard's Point Road. This would allow a greater buffer and the trail system, Outlot C, would go around the complete area to follow the perimeter of Outlot E. Wartman said they were attempting to stay with the same drainage patterns as shown in their initial watershed studies. He outlined runoff and drainage from the site noting that th majority of the water is directed to the pond area, as well as draining across the Outlot and eventually into the wetland which acts as a settling pond and then overflows into Lake Minnetonka. *" on+;le . . , PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MAY 17, 1983 PAGE THREE Val Gregerson, 5735 Howard's Point Road, noted that tiles used to drain the area and that the pond near Howard's Point Road had not been a wetland. Staff noted that the pond is not a designated wetland according to the City's Ordinance. The Commission discussed th desirability of adding it to the list. Staff added that another possibility wou d be to incorporate protection of the pond into the devel- opment agreement. It was suggested that 0 d drainage tiles had probably been broken when the sewer went in. Bev Sikorski, 5815 Howa d's Point Road, stated that her basement has been wet as long as the pond has ~x'sted. She expressed concern over the effects of permitting the pond to remain, addOng that it is stagnant during the summer and mosquitoes<1lre a problem. Staff remarked that in in general) that arrartg underneath Howard's Poi east side of the road. drainage plans will be Wartman noted that they inches to 3 to 4 feet. also to fill a 40 to 50 ground water away from peaking with the City Engineer (regarding the ponding area ments could be made for an overflow, perhaps a culvert t Road, which mig t possibly require easements along the The Engineer will be addressing the issue, and grading and equired in the fi al plat stage. plan to clean up he hoped it would foot section betw he blacktop and t He added that the ge area plans wer P.U.R.D.plat was appro ed. The pond has sac directs overflow into the first holdi noted that they would h ve no objection t he pond and increase the depth from 18 be an amenity to the area. He intends en the road and the pond to drain the landscape the area for the trail system. basically the same as when the original been enlarged and an additional cul~de- gpond which flows into the lake. Wartman an overflow from the pond (in Outlot E). There being no addition 1 comments from t e' public, the hearing was closed at 8:20. Commissioners asked if overflow would go 0 the swampland east of Howard's Point Road. It was noted that the Engineer would have to comment on the drainage concerns in greater detail. The Commission also raised the issue of t e cul-de-sac size requirements. Shorewood's Ordinance requires 120 foot right-of-way iameter and 100 foot paved surface diameter, and the preliminary plat for Outlot E sho s 100 foot r.o.w. and 80 foot paved surface. It was noted that the Engineer suggested the 100/80 dimensions were adequate and the Ordinance requirements were too restricti e. Staff commented that the Public Works Department had not had the opportunity to determine the diameter necessary for equip- ment turn-around. The Commission suggested that the Ordinance be changed if the requirements are too restrictive. Wartman explained that the request for variance to the front yard setback require- ments for lots 17 and 18 is to gain flexi iltiy and avoid potential delays at the time of construction. The request is for 30 foot setbacks. Leslie moved, Spellman seconded, to reco Boulder Bridge Outlot E preliminary plat yard setback requirements for lots 17 and end that the 'request for approval of e granted with a variance to the front 18, and subject to the following: -# on [1'/t. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MAY 17, 1983 PAGE FOUR (Motion continued...) The approval by the City Engineer as to grading, drainage and utilities Review and comment by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District in regards to the ponding area and drainage levels The cul-de-sac variance is considered adequate by the Public Works Dept. The motion carried unanimously, 6-0. Wartman stated that he would try to work with the neighbors and the Engineer to solve drainage problems. REQUEST FOR SETBACK VARIANCE - TESKE, RADISSON INN ROAD Application withdrawn - it was noted that a survey showed that the variance was not necessary. SIMPLE SUBDIVISION REQUEST - WINSTEAD, BURGER KING Mr. James Winstead explained that he wishes to combine the four separate parcels (located at 19425 State Highway 7) involved for tax purposes such that Burger King is all one parcel, and the lot to the south, a second. It was noted that the zoning line does not match the property lines. A concern that in the case of a zoning boundary dispute, the entire parcel might be consid- ered one zoning district or another, was mentioned. The Commission should be made. agreed that further study was needed and that no recommendation The following areas were suggested for discussion: History of the site ftccess considerations for the south lot The Vine Hill Road intersection problems REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT A SWIMMING POOL WITHIN 50 FEET OF THE LAKESHORE Planner Nielsen explained the request by Robin Woehnker, 4540 Enchanted Point, to place a swimming pool 23 feet from Lake Minnetonka. The lot size was noted to be 9,720 square feet. No one was present to represent Mr. Woehnker. (Attachment #4.Yk Reese moved, Leslie seconded, to recommend denial of the request. The motion carried unanimously, 6-0. The Commission noted that the proposal was too close to the lake 'and that no hardship was demonstrated. REPORTS: City Council - Councilman Shaw reported that the Board of Review had finished for 1983. Items covered at the Regular Council meeting included: Shorewood Condominiums - decision to be made at the next meeting Shorewood Professional Center has become the Sullivan Center Ordinance regulating "False Alarms" was reviewed Variance request on Oak Ridge Circle was denied - memo from Frank Kelly was passed to Commissioners for information on variances Zoning Ordinance Study Session - next meeting set for May 24th, 6:00 p.m., Home Occupation section * (jTI -h l.e- . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MAY 17, 1983 ! PAGE FIVE Park Commissibn - Staff noted that the Commission had discussed prohibiting soft- ball activities on baseball fields, and were developing pol~ciesfor.~ontrol- lfngifitility usage. ADJOURNMENT Leslie moved, Benson seconded, to adjourn. The motion carried unanimpusly, 6-0, and the meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, 1(~~~. Kathleen West, Secretary *' 0 ",fl' l-e . . , CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, JUNE 7, 1983 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:30 P.M. M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER Chairman Benson called the June 7, 1983 Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:44 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Bruce Benson, Frank Reese, Vern Watten, Janet Leslie, Mary Boyd, Bob Shaw (arrived at 8:00 p.m.); Council Liaison Tad Shaw; Planner Brad Nielsen; Secretary Kathy West Absent: Commissioner Richard Spellman APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES Approval of the May 17, 1983 Planning Commission meeting was tabled on motion of Benson, seconded by Reese, ayes 5. (THE AGENDA WAS REARRANGED) REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO EXPAND A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE - JORGENSEN - TIMBER LANE Mike Jorgensen was present to request a variance to enable him to add a 12 by 14 foot deck to his home at 5435 Timber Lane. (See Planner's report, Attachment #~) It was noted that the surrounding property owners had no objection to the addition. The house was described as nonconforming because the structure. does not meet the side yard setback requirements on the southeast. Jorgensen stated that he would remove an attachedlshed from that side of the house. It was noted that removing the shed would onlyjmake the structure less nonconforming. Jorgensen felt the proposed deck would b~ an improvement to the house. The addi- tion is proposed fo~ the northeast side 9f the house and will not increase the non- conformity.' i I Watten ~oved, Reese .seconded, to recommetd that the Council approve the request for variance subjec~ to removal of the nonconformity (the shed). j The motion carried ~nanimously, 5-0. REPORTS: City Council - Liaison Shaw reported that there had been only three Councilmembers present at the May 23rd m~eting and many of the agenda items will come up at the next meeti$g. The Burger King subdivision was approved. I Park Commission - Staff reported that th~ Commission is continuing to work on the playground equipment portfolios, a 1983 Community Picnic, and a newsletter. . 1- Of! {i Ie..- . . , CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION I MINUTES TUESDAYi, JUNE 7, 19$3 PAGE TWO PUBLIC HEARING - RE~UEST TO REZO~E FROM R-1 TO R-2 (POKORNY) Chairman Benson called the publi~ hearing to order at 8:00 p.m. by reading the legal notice as pubtished. Mr. Wayne Pokorny was present to request that his property located at 24275 Yellow~tone Trail be rezoned from R-1 to R-2. Pokorny explained that he w~nts to sell the property but has not been able to as one parcel. He felt th.t rezoning tp smaller lots would make it more developable. He noted that most of the surroupding properties south of Yellowstone Trail were one half acre lots. Land north of Yellowstone was desctibed as large parcels and open land, and property east pf Riviera Lane as one acre zoning. Mr. Keith Bedford, 24375.Wood Dr~ve, noted that most of the lots south of Yel- lowston~ Trail have I. large lot frp. ntage. . He refe~nce a comparison of 34 lots in the area (see Planner's report, Attachment #2~ notingthat according to his own calculations, two thirds of the existing lots would be larger than Pokorny's proposed 20,000 squ~re foot lotsl Bedford felt the plan was contrary to the housing pattern in the area. He noted that a laq~e neighborhopd meeting had been held and he presented a signed petition (se$ Attachment #3) against the rezoning. He also identified a letter from Paul Swanson, 24460 Yellowstone Trail, (see Attachment #4) op- posing the request. , (See also Attachment #~~a letter from the Minnetonka Country Club registering approval of the req~est.) Bedford noted that it might be d~fficult to hook the lots up to the sewer lines which run between t~e pond and tpe residences along Wood Drive. Bedford added a concern that Pokorny's lot sizes would make up their square footage in depth but would be inadeq$ate in width~ I It was emphasized t~at, althoughj any future lots would have to meet the zoning district standards, the potentia~ division sketch provided by Mr. Pokorny was not under review, bat rather only the rezoning issue. Mr. Bedford added that the neighporhood was worried about municipal water lines going through the area with addi~ional developments. Ms. Nancy Turner, 23980 Yellowstone Trail, noted that she was concerned about additional traffic On Yellowstone Trail, Wood Drive, Tee Trail and Lake Linden Drive. . Road improv~ments and increased traffic speed were listed as concerns. Ms. Diane Anderson, 124415 Wood Drive, agreed with Turner's comments. She added that the higher density and smal~ lots might make the area seem "junkie" and lower tpe property values. Mr. Bob Reutiman, 5915 Galpin Lake Road, questioned the potential number of lots. It was noted that PQkorny's sket~h showed 9 lots. Considering only the square footage of the parcel in questiop, 10 lots were cited as possible under R-2 zoning. Reutiman stated that hel felt Pokorny had not asked for anything unusual or unreasonable. He noted that fewer lots might be preferable. WaldeenWillis, 24835 under current zoning. 5.2 acres, allowing'5 Yellowstone Trail, asked how many lots would be permitted The property was described as containing approximately lots at R-l standards. I Audrey Reinsch, 6100 Riviera Lane, asked of additional roads would be added. It was noted tthat acq:.ording to the proposed sketch, access to the propert;y would be from Yellowstone ,Trail and Wood Drive. ~ on file- . . , JUNE 7, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE THREE Rachel Leonardo, 5845 Country Club Road, also asked about the number and type of struk:tures allow~d under current and proposed zoning. It was noted that only single family residences would be permitted under R-l or R-2 zoning. Ms. Leonar4o commented that the Planning Commission must consider either the re- quest by the single!property owner for a change in zoning, or the opinions of the neighborhood ~ ~5% opposed. Gene Clapp, 24115 Y~llowstone Trail, noted that the. recent subdivision on his property (by Larry ~ader) had been kept to R-l one acre lots. He felt that if Pokorny.'s property is changed to R-2, Mr. Bader would be back for rezoning. Don Willlis, 24835 Yellowstone Trail, stated that he felt that as with past pro- posals ~n the neighborhood, this request was not in his best interests or the best interests of the majority of the people who move to Shorewood. Jim Bas~field, 24355 Wood Drive, said that he had bought into an R-l neighbor- hood and wants it to stay that way. He felt Wood Drive is too small to support additional traffic and he noted concern for children in the area. Joel Capesius, 6120: Club Valley Road, agreed with Baskfield as to buying and staying in an R-l a~ea. He felt the Commission should take into consideration the people who will continue to live in the area rather than those who might be sellin . Mr. Po orny noted that the people who bought homes in the area for open space don't ay for it. He felt that he should be entitled to split his land into the sa e size parce!ls as those surrounding him. He stated that R~2 zoning seems logical. The Comprehensive Plan was reference as to density suggestions. It was noted the lots surrounding Pokorny's property are zoned R-l but are not 40,000 square foot lots. Keith edford reiterated his concern over small lot width. He suggested that a cul-de-sac in to the property be considered. Mr. and Mrs. Skreen!, 24295 Wood Drive, questioned whether fill would be needed.- The expressed concern related to drainage. The Skreen's and Mr. Pokorny disa- greed as to existing drainage patterns. Mr. and Mrs. Skreen stated that Pokorny's property drains int!o the pond along Highway 7 via a culvert running across their property. Pokorny !felt the drainage was natural and n<iJ.bed that there had been no water problems during heavy rains. It was noted that no drainage easement exists. Rachel Leonardo questioned Mr. Pokorny's intentions as far as subdividing and overseeing the sal~ of the lots. Pokorny noted that he plans to subdivide the lots and sell to several builders. Ms. Leonardo and Ge!ne Clapp questioned the need for R-2 zoning versus R-l. Pokorny noted that !he wants the same rights as those owning the lots surrounding him on three sides i(zoned R-1) - lots smaller than one acre. Mr. Bedford reiter~ted his previous testimony. There being no additional public comments, the hearing was closed at 8:40 p.m. The City Planner reviewed his report (See Attachment #2)~ '* () () .p; I-e.- . . . JUNE 7, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES P AGE FOUR The Commission asked for the density levels suggested in the Shorewood Compre- hensive Plan. One to two units per acre density was noted. Zoning districts in the proposed Zoning Ordinance were discussed. Some Commis- sioners suggested that the intermediate zones, such as R-1b (30,000 square foot lots) might be more appropriate in this area. The possibility of a compromise was discussed. It was noted that few of the existing lots in the area could meet the 30,000 square foot requirements. Shaw moved, Benson seconded, to recommend that the Council deny the request to rezone to R-2. The motion carried, 6-0, on a roll call vote. Pokorny requested reasons for the Planning Commission's vote. The Commission noted that they were not respnsible for the way lots were divided in the past. They felt looking at the future is important. It was suggested that Pokorny should work with the City Planner and the neighbors. Proposing a P.U.D. for the parcel was suggested, along with lowering the density. The following comments were made by the individual Commissioners: Frank Reese noted that he felt 20,000 square foot lots were inappropriate in this neighborhood. Janet Leslie felt the Commission can't take responsibility for what may have been too dense zoning in this area. She noted that she would have been willing to look at a compromise but that giving a flat R-2 rezoning for this area was inappropriate. Mary Boyd agreed that changing a neighborhood from R-1 to R-2 was difficult. She noted a significant difference between a 40,000 square foot and a 20,000 square foot lot, but felt a reasonable compromise might be okay. Vern Watten commented on the efforts. that had gone into preparing the new Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan, noting that he felt rezoning the property was not in keeping with the intent of the plans. Bob Shaw and Bruce Benson agreed with what had been stated by the other Commis- sioners and had nothing to add. (THE COMMISSION RECESSED FROM 9:10 TO 9:15 P~M.) REQUEST FOR SIGN VARIANCE - DRISKILL'S SUPER VALU - 24750 STATE HIGHWAY #7 The applicant was not represented at the meeting. Planner Nielsen explained Driskill's request to replace signage at the Shorewood Shopping Center. The two existing signs - "SUPER VALU" and "DRISKILL'S SUPER VALU" - are proposed to be replaced with "DRISKILL'S" and "SUPER VALU (logo)" respectively. (See Attachment #6 . )1< The size of the proposed signage is less than the existing. Nielsen noted that current signage is nonconforming and was allowed as a variance. ~ ()(I 1:/<:- . . . JUNE 7, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE FIVE The request does not meet the current Zoning Ordinance requirements but does conform to those in he proposed ordinance. Nielsen suggested that the Commission consider the new ordi ance and he recommended approval of the request. Reese moved, Watten seconded, to recommend that the Council grant the sign variance. The motion c rried unanimously, 5-0. REQUEST FOR ARIANCE TO EXPAND A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE - RAND - 5950 GRANT STREET Ms. Rand was not represented at the meeting. Planner Nielsen explained Ms. Rand's request to add a first floor bedroom and bath (see report, Attachment #7i/J. The Commission discussed the lot orientation, size, zoning and distance from adjacent houses. Ms. Rand's age was suggested as a possible hardship. Shaw moved, Reese seconded, to recommend that the Council approve the request for variance subject to the Planner's recommendation. The motion carried unanimously, 5-0. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PROCEDURE - FIRST DRAFT The Commission reviewed an outline for a procedure to amend the Comprehensive Plan presented by Planner Nielsen (Attachment #8)~ Nielsen noted that the City Staff feels it is important to have such a procedure in effect. He requested that the Commission consider specifically the requirements for fees and notification distance. The Commission made comments regarding the type of information that should be given to applicants. It was suggested that both the legal and political aspects of requests be covered. A question was raised relating to modifications to proposals under item E. The Com- mission discussed tabling recommendations until any modifications in plans could be presented for Planning Commission review. As far as the notification distance, no objection to 500 feet was noted. A sug- gestion was made to contact all properties within an affected Planning District. The proposed fees were seen as reasonable. ADJOURNMENT . Watten moved, Boyd seconded, to adjourn. The motion carried unanimously and the meeting was adjourned at approximately 10:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~-W~ Kathleen West, Secretary ':if t)n t/~ . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, JUNE 21, 1983 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:30 P.M. M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER Chairman Benson called the June 21st Planning Cqmmission meeting to order at 7:42 p.m. I i i i I I PRESENT: Commissioners Frank Reese, Richard spJllman, Mary Boyd, Bob Shaw; Council Liaison Tad Shaw; Planner Br4d Nielsen; Secretary Kathy West i Commissioners Vern Watten (business c1mmitment), Janet Leslie I I I May 17, 1983: The Minutes were approved as written on motion of Benson, seconded i by Reese. Ayes - 5. i I June 7, 1983: the Minutes were approved as wri~ten on motion of Boyd, seconded by Benson. Ayes - 5. I ROLL CALL ABSENT: APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES I PUBLIC HEARING: CHRISTMAS LAKE ADDITION - PRELiMINARY PLAT I Chairman Benson called the hearing to order by reading the legal notice as pub- lished June 8, 1983. Bernice Brooks was present to explain her request to sub- divide property located at 21135 Radisson Inn R~ad. She noted that the prelimi- mary plat shows 5 lots, some requiring variance~. It was noted that approval for subdivision had been granted in 1979 but time h,d la.psed before the plat was re- corded, therefore the request was being reproce$sed. Steve Larson, 20435 Radisson Inn Road, (preside~t of the Christmas Lake Association and past Shorewood Planning Commissioner) requefted background on the previou.s ap- proval. Chairman Benson read Planning Commissitn minutes dated June 21, 1979 (see Attachment #1)~and City Council Minutes dated J~ne 25, 1979 (Attachment #2)~ I Mr. Larson asked what variances are required onlthe 1983 plat. The Planner listed the following (see Planner's report, Attachment #3~for plat): 1) Lot #5 lot area variance of 5380 square feet 2) Lot #1 - lot width variance of 20 feet 3) Lot #3 - lot width variance of 5 feet 4) A variance to exclude Tract E (an adjacent parcel of land which is under common ownership) from the plat It was noted that the previous proposal (including Tract E) required nine variances, six to lot area and three to lot width standards. John Cousins, 5955 Christmas Lake Road, questioned the procedure involved for plat approval. It was noted that recommendations-fran the Planning Commission, the Park Commission, and approval from the Watershed District and the State Department of Transportation are required before final plat approval. ':f aH(tohmenfs on hIe- . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JUNE 21, 1983 PAGE TWO Carol Chapman, Park Commission Chairman, reported that the Commission had reviewed the preliminary plat and had recommended that the City Council investigate the pos- sibility of land dedication from this subdivision for a potential canoe access. There waS some discussion as to the amount of land which might be donated (approxi- mately 10,000 square feet was mentioned). Possible conflicts with the D.N.R. were noted. It was pointed out that if land is dedicated to the City park system, changes in the plat might be required, possibly lowering the number of lots to four. Mr. Cousins commented that the City would be buying itself trouble with a 10,000 square foot park. Mr. Larson also questioned the City's plans for acquiring road right-of-way, noting that it seemed unfair to take land from the property owner for both road and park improvements. There being no additional comments, the public hearing was closed at 8:00 p.m. The Commission reviewed the Planner's report. It was noted that an additional 20 feet of right-of-way is needed along this portion of Radisson Inn Road to meet City standards (50 foot r.o.w.). Nielsen recommended that 10 feet be acquired along Mrs. Brooks' side of the road. Nielsen pointed out technical details still to be completed - drainage and utility easements need to be placed on all the proposed lot lines, and MnDOT and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District approval is necessary. Nonconforming structures on lot #1 need to be moved or removed. Nielsen suggested that granting the variances may be appropriate, noting that the City wants to acquire land for r.o.w. and that the proposed lots are larger than the surrounding properties. The Commission questioned the variance to leave Tract E unplatted. Nielsen noted that technically the substandard lot should be platted. Granting the variance was discussed as a trade off for the acquisition of r.o.w., the correction of noncon- formities, and in consideration of the small lots in the area. It was noted that lots 3,4 and 5 would be affected by the r.o.w. dedication but that all proposed lots are greater than 40,000 square feet with the exception of lot #5. It was also pointed out that excluding Tract E reduces the total land area from which a park dedication might be calculated. The Park Commission recommendation was seen as a separate issue to be addressed by the Council. The Planning Commission questioned the possibility of preventing future variances as suggested in the Planner's recommendations. It was pointed out that the actions of future Councils and Commissions could not be controlled, but the intention to prevent additional variances should be noted. Spellman moved, Boyd seconded, to recommend to the Council that the plat be approved subject to the recommendations in the Planners's report, and that ten (10) feet be dedicated for right-of-way from Tract E also. The motion carried unanimously on a roll call vote - 5 ayes, 0 nays. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JUNE 21, 1983 PAGE THREE PUBLIC HEARING - REQUEST TO REZONE FROM R-l to C-l, TEX-SOTA (Minnesota Ministorage) Chairman Benson reopened the public hearing continued from the March 15, 1983 Plan- ning Commission meeting. Mr. Bruce Hubbard of Tex-Sota Construction was present to discuss his request for rezoning and the proposed use for property located at 19545/85 State Highway #7 (see Planning Commission Minut~s - 3/15/83 - for proposal and Planner's report). Hubbard described the location, ~he surrounding land uses and site conditions and explained his proposal to build ~elf-storage facilities. There were no comments from those present and the public ihearing was closed at I 8:29 p.m. I Planner Nielsen noted that the Planning Commission should address the rezoning issue ~nd that the conditional use permit requires separate aC~ion.Nielsenreported that the Council had amended the C-l District to include self~storage facilities and re- moved eating and drinking establishments. It was suggested that the Commission should review the rezoning issue without considering the proposed use. It was noted that the Comprehensive Plan suggests that some non-residential use may be appropriate along the Highway 7 corridor, therefore a Comp Plan amendment was not necessary. There was discussion as to the depth of the site - strethfuing 200-400 feet back from the highway at various points. Reese noted that he felt the lot dimensions were in keePing with the idea of the highway corridor. The possibility that Mr. Hubbard might not follow through with the proposed use was mentioned. The Commission discussed other cities'methods of assuring that a proposal be developed as planned. It was noted that a P.U.D. would not have been appropriate for this project because of the acreage requirements for mixed com- mercial/residential uses. Reese moved, Benson seconded, to recommend that the Council rezone the property in question to a C-l District. The motion carried unanimously on a roll call vote, 5 ayes. Reese added that he felt the zoning is appropriate along this area and that prob- lems with vehiclular access to the property might have to be addressed as a sepa- rate item. He felt the use of the land was appropriate. It was noted that, assuming the Council rezones the property, Hubbard would have to return for approval of the conditional use permit. The Commission noted that they had been concerned with vandal lighting on the east side. Hubbard suggested that spillover might be avoided by using light poles facing toward the building rather than the wooded area. The Commission recessed from 8:42 to 8:51 p.m. REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO EXPAND A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE - ARSTS Ojars and Mara Arsts were present to answer any questions regarding their request to replace the front portion of their house at 20960 Radisson Inn Road. Mr. Arsts explained that they wished to remodel the former cabin by removing a 20' x 20' sec- tion of the house and constructing a 2 story, 15~' x 32' addition. Arsts contended that the existing structure is a 1~ story house, the attic being unimproved space, rather that 1 story as suggested in the Planner's report (see Attachment #4).~ ~ {)(\ fIle . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JUNE 21, 1983 PAGE FOUR Mr. and Mrs. Arsts explained that they wished to expand the former cabin by adding to the south side of the structure, retaining a view of the lake and gaining solar access. They noted that there is a low marshy wetland area to the north of the house and speculated that drainage into it will probably increase as a result of the Tinge- wood project. The Arsts noted that the neighbors do not object to their proposal. Commission members expressed concern over the distance between the structure and the road. The Planner's report located the existing house at 6.5 feet from the road easement and the proposed addition at 3 feet. Chairman Benson noted that the City has been attempting to correct problems with substandard streets such as Radisson Inn Road. He suggested that the proposal as designed might make a poor condition worse. Commission members questioned whether or not the proposed design might be altered, such as adding to the north side, without encroaching upon the road or right-of-way. Arsts pointed out that other neighboring homes do not meet setback requirements. Spellman moved, Benson seconded, to recommend that the Council deny the Arsts' application for a variance. The motion carried, 4 ayes, 1 nay (Shaw). Benson and Reese suggested that the Arsts consider redesigning the addition to see if it can be accomplished without going closer to the street. Commissioner Boyd noted that in visiting the site she had not seen any standing water to the north of the house. It was noted that the current Zoning Ordinance does not allow any expansion of a nonconforming structure; the proposed ordinance does permit changes as long as the expansion does not increase the nonconformity_ MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR Winterfield Office Request - Gary Winterfield presented elevations'i grading, drainage and landscaping plans for a proposed office building locat~d at the corner of Chaska Road and State Highway #7. Mike and Cindy Marr, 6015 Chaska Road, and Doug and Pam Groskre tz, 5985 Chaska Road, were present for the plan review. The Marr's expressed a desire or as much buffering as possible, especially near the parking area. Winterfield indicated that small trees on the property might be relocated to add to the buffer. Planner Nielsen stated that th drainage plans. It was noted Highway 7 ditch. City Engineer had not completed rev~ewing the hat most of the runoff would be directed to the Boyd moved, Spellman seconded, ted plans, and, if possible mo The motion carried unanimously to recommend that the Council approve the submit- e the small trees on the property fo buffering. 5-0. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT P OCEDURE The item was postponed to a la er agenda. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JUNE 21, 1983 PAGE FIVE REPORTS: Council - Liaison Shaw reportej that the Council had approved the following: Boulder Bridge PU~D and preliminary plat Rand variance reqJest Driskill's sign v~riance Johnsen - rezoned R-3, acquired 8,000 sqaure feet for right-of-way Hendrikson pool Jorgensen deck va iance Shorewood Condomi:1iums - concept stage Changes in the C- District to allow self-storage faciiites and remove eating and drinking establishments Park Commission - Staff report d that Park board members were woding on the the Manor Park so tball field, the 1983 Community Picnic, playground equipment portfol.os, and had reviewed the Christmas Lake Addition subdivision. ADJOURNMENT Shaw moved, Reese seconded, to adjourn. The motion carried unaninously, 5-0, and the meeting was adjourned it 9:54 P.M. Respectfully submitted, 1(~(j\/ud:;- Kathleen West, Secretary , . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION ~EETING TUESDAY, JULY 5, 198 COUNCIL CHAMBERS] 5755 COUNTRY CLU ROAD 7:30 P. M. M I NUT E S 1. CALL TO ORDER: ~~~~ ~~~led theg~ 5, 1983 Planning Commission Acting Chairman Bob meeting to order at ROLL CALL: Present: CommissionErs Bob Shaw, Janet Leslie, Mary Boyd, Frank Reese; Council Liaison Tad Shaw; Planner Brad Nielsen; Deputy Cle k Sue Niccum Absent: CommissionErs Richard Spellman, Bruce Benson and Vern Watten APPROVAL OF MINUTES: I Minutes will be readt for approval at the next meeting. REQUEST FOR SWIMMING POOL VARIANCE - KNAPP - 28085 BOULDER BRIDGE DR. Mr. Seaman Knapp camE before the Commission to request a variance for the decking arourd his pool. I Leslie moved, second~d by Reese, to approve the variance and advise Council to accept it~ 4 ayes. I Planner Nielsen aske4 for a recommendation on the gazebo, stating that it was not incl~ded in the Public Hearing Notice and would need a separate hear ng. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ArENDMENT PROCEDURE: Planner Nielsen statE d that it is not ready. MATTERS FROM THE FLOtBi. I i none CONSIDERATION OF AMEJ DING SWIMMING POOL SET BACKS: Commission discussed the idea of amending swimming pool set backs. Boyd requested Deeph, ven and Minnetonka set back requirements. Reese questioned whe her or not this would include tennis court fences. Planner Nielsen was 1 sked to gather more information on other cities set backs. HE was also asked to check the State Building code requirements fo side and end widths on swimming pool decks. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, JULY 5, 1983 page two REPORTS: Council Liaison Shaw reported on: 1. Ai Leonardo's resignation from the Council due to a promotion, not leaving enough time to devote to his Council position. 2. Christmas Lake Subdivision pa~sed on a 5 - 0 vote. 3. Policy setting - water - Special meeting to discuss alternatives and meaningful statistics. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 8:17 PM on the motion of Reese, seconded by Leslie. Respectfully subm~tted, ~~ Sue Niccum Deputy Clerk MEMORANDUM pi 1,' MA YOR Robert Rascop COUNCIL Jan Haugen Tad Shaw Alexander Leonardo Kristi Stover ADMINISTRATOR Doug Uhrhammer CITY OF ,SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD,MINNESOTA55331.(612) 474-3236 TO: SHOREWOODPLANNING COMMISSION, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: BRAD NIELSEN DATE: 14 JULY 1983 RE: KOCH, DONALD - NARIANCETO EXPAND A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE FILE NO.: 405 (83.26) Mr. Donald Koch, 25835 Wild Rose LanelseeSit.eLocationmap, requested a building permit to removehis!3ttached single car garage and add 12 feet to the front of it. The house and garage are currently nonconforming due to their proximity to :the side lot lines. As a consequence the ~pplicant variance toal ter:and expand a nonconforming structure.' The lot 1iscurrentlyzoned R-1, measures 70'>x22.5' and contains 15,750, square feet of area. The garage is six feet from the east property line and the house is eight from the west property line. ;~. ., -. - -0 BACKGROUND The reason for the request is that the garage has suffered some structural damage, and in making the necessary repairs he would like to extend it 12 feet to the north so as:to accommodate two cars. The garage currently meas- ures 16' x 25'witha nine foot overhang. Extending the structure 12 feet will allow two cars to be parked end to end. According to the applicant, when the house to the east of his was built it was inadvertently placed oyer the prop~rty line~Rather than force his neigh- bor to remove it, he gave up 13 feet of his property. Unfortunately it in- creased the nonconformity-ofhis lotand>st'ructure. , A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore . . , Shorewood Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council 14 July 1983 Page Two The applicant indicated that it was not possible to rebuild the garage at the rear of the house due to the existing grade of the lot. This was verified upon site inspection. To do so would require major site alteration and pos- sibly affect drainage around the house. Given the need to repair the existing garage, the circumstances under which the property became nonconforming, and the proximity of the neighbor's garage to the east, the request is not considered unreasonable. BJN:kw cc: Doug Uhrhammer Gary Larson Jim Norton Donald Koch Kathy West Attachment.#2 Planning C~ission Minutes Tuesday, July 19, 1983 CITY OF SHOREWOOD MA VOR Ro~rt Rascop : COUNCIL .Ian Haugen Tad Shaw Alexander Leonardo Kristi Stover ADMINISTRATOR Doug Uhrharnrner 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD e SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 e(612) 474-3236 MEMORANDUM TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: BRAD NIELSEN DATE: 15 JULY 1983 RE: SETBACKS FOR SWIMMING POOLS FILE NO.: 405 (general) In my staff report on the Seaman Knapp swimming pool variance it was recom- mended that if the variance were to be granted that it should immediately be followed by an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance allowing pools to encroach (to some degree) into rear yard setback areas. The commission voted to recom- mend approval of the variance and also directed.staff to expand upon a list of what other communities require. The variance was subsequently passed by the Council with at least one member suggesting that the Ordinance be amended . This memo provides an expanded list of setback requirements for various .Com- munities.Please note that we deliberately avoided the two central cities and first ring suburbs. We have also only researched rear yard setbacks, assuming that Shorewood's current side yard setbacks are minimal can be seen, Shorewood's rear yard setback for swimming pools more restrictive than those of other communities. REAR YARD SETBACKS FOR SWIMMING POOLS - VARIOUS METRO AREA COMMUNITIES Blaine Bloomington Brooklyn Park Burnsville Chanhassen Cottage Grove Eagan * Eden Prairie Maple Grove Minnetonka 10' 15' 10' 8' 30' 8' 5 5-30' 10' 15' Minnetrista New Brighton Orono (1 acre +) (up to 1 acre) Plymouth Shoreview Victoria Wayzata White Bear Lake Woodbury * Depands on the zoning district. . A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore 10' 10' 50' 30' 6' 10' 5' 10' 10' 10' . . . Planning Commission 15 July 1983 Page Two To expedite the amendment process, a draft amendment has been prepared for discussion purposes (see attached). Assuming 30 feet is an acceptable rear yard requirement for R-l lotst the amendment has been written to require only 60% of the rear yard setback otherwise required in the zoning district in which the subject property is located. The following shows the resulting setbacks for each of the current zoning districts. DISTRICT REAR YARD SETBACK 60% DISTRICT REAR YARD SETBACK 60% R-1 50 ft. 30 ft. R-2 50 ft. 30 ft. R-3 40 ft. 24 ft. R-4 25 ft. 15 ft. R-5 40 ft. 24 ft. As a final note, the City Council mentioned the possibility of also allowing tennis courts as a rear yard encroachment. So for discussion purposes tennis courts have been included in the draft amendment. . BJN:kw cc: Doug Uhrhammer Gary Larson Jim Norton Kathy West City Council . . . .. # ORDINANCE NO. (DRAFT) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 77 IN THE CITY OF. SHOREWOOD BEING AN ORDINANCE FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROMOTING HEALTH, SAFETY, ORDER, CONVENIENCE, PROSPERITY AND GENERAL WELFARE BY REGULATING THE USE OF LAND, THE LOCATION AREA, SIZE AND USE AND HEIGHT OF BUILDINGS ON LOTS AND THE DENSITY OF POP- ULATION IN THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA. The City Council of the City of Shorewood, does ordain: Section 1. Ordinance No. 77, Section 11, Subdivision 6. Yard and Frontage Limitations Not Applicable, is hereby amended to include the following: "E. Allowable Rear Yard Encroachments. In addition to the provisions set forth in A. through D. of this Subdivision, the minimum rear yard setback for swimming pools and tennis courts shall be sixty (60) percent of that which is required for the zoning district in which the .pool .or tennis court is located. Rear yard setbacks for lakeshore lots shall be as provided in this Section." Section 2. This Ordinance shall be effective from and after its passage and publication. ADOPTED by the City Council .of the City of Shorewood , 1983. Robert Rascop, Mayor ATTEST: Sandra L. Kennelly, Clerk . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 19, 1983 PAGE TWO REPORTS Park Commission: Liaison Tad Shaw reported that the Park Board is preparing for the Shorewood Festival of Parks to be held August 13th and 14th. Council: Councilman Shaw reported from the July 11th meeting noting that the Council had reviewed the following: The Arsts' variance request on Radisson Inn Road Mr. and Mrs Arsts will be returning with new plans. Fayfield swimming pool request on Christmas Lake Road approved. Shaw also noted that applications for the Couricil position vacated by Al Leonardo will be accepted through Monday. ADJOURNMENT Leslie moved, Benson seconded, to adjourn. The motion carried unanimously, 4-0, and the meeting was adjourned at 8:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, f\~1Jf'~ Kathleen West, Secretary ~'--- j?--- .. " (. , CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, AUGUST 2, 1983 1. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL: 2. --~ ...7'- ~j,\~ AGENDA a. b. JUNE 21, 1983 JULY 5, 1983 JULY 19, 1983 APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES ~~ Ie c. 3. II .j..P () fl a q ~ B:t II ..' . COUNCIL CHAMBERS i 5755 COUNTRY CL.U1'$MAf) 7:30 P.M. ROLL CALL SCHEDULE ~ERN WATTEN I.~ ~ANETLESLIE L- FRANK REESE RICHARD SPELLMAN "/'BOB SHAW /MARY BOYD ~RUCE BENSON I-{-O ~l( IY. I (} () q " Cf at 7:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDlTIONAL USE PERMI.T.FORA SELF-STORAGE FACILITY IN THE C-1 DISTRICT AND A VARIANCE TO THE SETBACK REQUIREMENT ADJACENT TO AN R-DISTRICT LOCATION: 19545 STATE HIGHWAY 7 APPLICANT: BRUCE HUBBARD, TEX-SOTA (MINNESOTA MINI-STORAGE) t. () q q 'a 4. REQUEST.FOR VARIANCE TO EXPAND A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE LOCATION: 28210 WOODSIDE ROAD APPLICANT: SID VERDORN (Recommendation to be sent to the Council for an August 8th public hearing) 5. REQUE$T TO LOCATE TELEPHONE SWITCH STATION AND ANTENNA ",.' " INFORMAL PRESENTATION BY NORTHWEST A.M.P.S. 6. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR 7 . REPORTS 8. ADJOURNMENT c. ~ . ;r':~ CITY OF SHOREWOOD MAYOR Robert RascOI' COUNCIL Jan Haugen Tad Shaw Alexander Leonardo KristiStover ADMINISTRATOR Ooug Uhrhammer 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD. MINNESOTA 55331 . (612) 474-3236 ~. ~ ll.n.& \ 4-} \ '18?t Miss Kathy West 640 Mound Avenue Mankato, MN 56001 ~A^A_ Dear Kathy, cvnCL ~~ ~ The Planning Commission and the Park comrnission~asked me' if I'd drop a note and ask if they could please have the missing minutes. Hope everything is going well with you! ~ Take care, Still Sue Niccum Secretary you -tho) '- Qtl La -1:0 D-8l1d tlill1o.pEs "+ Yalll rdf..S ~ u)E-Icl. ~ tfill.m . ~ ',. A Residential C mmuniry on Lake Minneronka's South Shore . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, OCTOBER 4, 1983 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:30 PM M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER Chairman Benson called the October 4th Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:35 PM. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Bruce Benson, Vern Watten, Janet Leslie, Mary Boyd; Council Liaison Tad Shaw, Planner Brad Nielsen; Secretary Sue Niccum Absent: Commissioners Frank Reese, Richard Spellman and Bob Shaw PUBLIC HEARING - CONCEPT STAGE APPROVAL FOR P.U.D. - ROBERT S. C. PETERSON 5474 COVINGTON ROAD Chairman Benson reopened the public hearing continued from September 6, 1983 Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Robert Peterson was present to discuss his request to subdivide his property into five single family residential lots. He J)lirre$:llJrit:ed maps and surveys to the Commission, along with a letter from Dr. Steve Larson regarding an easement through his property to the southern portion of the site. The Public portion of the hearing was opened at 8:45 P.M. and closed at 8:46 P.M. with no public comment. . The Planning Commission discussed the road right-of-way, cuI de sac, and the common area. Watten moved, seconded by Boyd, that the received request be granted subject to recommendations in the Planners Report and also a clarification on whether the proposed common area would be preserved as an outlot or by easement. Motion carried by Roll Call Vote - 4 ayes. REQUEST FOR SIGN VARIANCE -CHAMPION AUTO STORE - MR. KENNETH GRIFF~THS Mr. Griffiths did not appear before the Commission so there was no discussion. REQUEST FOR LOT DIVISION AND VARIANCE - RICHARD SMITH - 5860 RIDGE ROAD Mr. Richard Smith appeared before the Planning Commission to discuss dividing his lot into two parcels, with no plans to build on the second parcel at this time. The Planning Commission discussed the 50 foot setback recommended in the Planner's Report. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, OCTOBER 4, 1983 page two Boyd moved, seconded by Leslie, that the City grant the variance allowing the creation of a lot not fronting a public road, but maintaining a 50 foot front setback, with the agreement that a letter f~om Mr. Nelson's engineer regarding the suitability of the new lot for building purposes be attached to the property file. Motion carried by Roll Call Vote - 3 ayes (Leslie, Boyd, Benson) 1 nay (Watten) REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO ALTER A NONCONFORMING USE - HENRY ARENT - 4812 FERNCROFT DR. Mr. Henry Arent was present to explain he; owns a rental property with 2 units, one of which is vacant. He wants to remodel the apartment unit to bring it up to Building Code standards. Planner Nielsen reported that the structure (1) is a nonconforming structure, (2) is a nonconforming use - the Ordinance states that you cannot structurally alter or expand a nonconforming structure or use. Mr. Arent's position is that he'd like to bring it up to state building code standards but in order to do this he has to structurally alter it and he can't do that because of the Zoning Ordinance. Planner Nielsen's opinion is that there is no hardshiP, because the property can be used as a single family dwelling as per the existing zoning. This is an R-2 Area, and the property in question is only 8000 square feet in area. Planner Nielsen also mentioned that in reviewing the new Zoning Ordinance the City chose not to allow accessary apartments in single family districts. After considerable discussion about two-family homes in areas zoned for one- family homes, Benson moved, seconded by Boyd, that the variance be denied. Tied by Roll Call Vote. 2 ayes (Benson and Boyd) 2 nays (Watten and Leslie) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PROCEDURES - FIRST DRAFT This would be given to applicants requesting a change to the Comprehensive Plan. The guidelines are designed so that the applicant must demonstrate why the change should take place. A preapplication stage allows the applicant to present his ideas to the Planning Commission at minimal cost. The applicant can meet with the staff and talk over what they might suggest or require, then come to the Planning Commission and pre- sent it to them on an informal basis before there is a public hearing so it gives the Planning Commission a chance to become familiar with the request, ask for any additional information, and gives them some guidance as to the acceptability of the proposal. The main items to be considered are: 1. The $1000 fee, divided into two portions: a. $200 initial or base fee b. $800 escrow deposit . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, OCTOBER 4, 1983 page three 2. Who do we notify? 3. How far do we extend the notices? 4. What information should be required? The Planner would like the Planning Commission to make a recommendation on the procedures at the study session on October 18th so it can be presented to the Council at the October 24th meeting. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR none REPORTS Councilmember Tad Shaw reported on the following meetings: September 12 Council meeting A.M.P.S. Tower Ordinance The first reading was held September 12th, the Second reading October 3rd, and the third reading is scheduled for October 24th. McCary Subdivision Council approved the subdivision. Swimming Pool Rear Yard Setback Recommendation Above was accepted and an ordinance amendment was adopted. Howard's Point Marina Above was defeated on a 2/2 vote. Union Negotiations Council decided not to open negotiations due to the fact that the letter requesting negotiation was received after the deadline stipulated in the union contract. Fire LANE Dock - Eureka Road Motion was made to have Administrator investigate other cities fire lane policies and set a Public Hearing for a.possible zone amendment. MEETINGS: September 19, 1983 - Budget Presented September 20, 1983 - Budget - Arnie Carlson, State Auditor discussed financial position in city. September 26, 1983 - Union Council Brooks Addition Approved Edgewood Road Budget - Citizen Discussion Water - Police - Employees Wages . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION TUESDAY, OCTOBER 18, 1983 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:30 PM M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER Chairman Benson called the October 18th Planning Commisssion Meeting to order at 7:45 PM. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Bruce Benson, Janet Leslie, Mary Boyd, Frank Reese, Bob Shaw; Planner/Secretary Brad Nielsen Absent: Commissioners Richard Spellman and Vern Watten COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PROCEDURES - FIRST DRAFT The Planning Commission discussed suggested changes to the first draft of the guidelines for amending the Comprehensive Plan. The following items were to be changed: Page 3 Section 3. A.3.c. - The words "precise" and "with invert elevations on and" are to be deleted. Page 3 Section 3.A.4.e. - to be replaced with "e. Comparison of traffic which would be generated by existing land use designation or zoning and proposed use." Page 4 Section 3.6 -The words "or sizes of nonresidential uses" to be inserted between "dwelling units" and "which may" Page 6 Section 4.C.2 -First word in sentence to be capitalized. Reese moved, seconded by Leslie, to recommend that the City Council adopt the Comprehensive Plan Amendment Guidelines with modifications as noted. motion passed unanimously. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM 4 OCTOBER 1983 Reese asked that the minutes reflect that his absence from the meeting was an excused absence. Moved by Shaw, seconded by Boyd to approve the 4 October 1983 Planning Commission minutes as noted. Motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission then commended the new secretary, Sue Niccum on the quality of the minutes. ADJOURNMENT Reese moved, seconded by Leslie, to adjourn. The motion carried unanimously and the meeting was adjourned at 9:40 PM. . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 1, 1983 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:30 P.M. M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER Chairman Benson called the November 1, 1983, Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:40 PM. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Janet Leslie, Frank Reese, Richard Spellman, Bob Shaw, Mary Boyd, Bruce Benson, Vern Watten; Planner Brad Nielsen; Council Liaison Tad Shaw; Secretary Sue Niccum Absent: none APPROVAL OF MINUTES Reese moved, seconded by Watten, to approve the minutes of October 18, 1983 as written. Motion carried unanimously. 7:30 PUBLIC HEARING - LAKE VIRGINIA LIFT STATION - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT The hearing began at 7:42 with Mr. Stenborg of Metropolitan Waste Control g1v1ng a presentation. He informed the Commission that they want to install an odor control system consisting of a blower with a carbon unit that will filter out chemicals that cause odors. It will be built between the building and the lake to conceal the unit. It will be enclosed to protect it from vandalism and heat/cold, and to deaden the sound of the blower. They have a similar station in Wayzata by the beach and have not received any complaints on that un't. Commissioner Leslie a ked what construction material will be and was told it will be reinforced fibergl ss treated on inside and painted on the outside to protect it from sunlight. Public portion closed at 7:43 with no comment. Watten moved, seconde by Reese, to recomment to the Council to provide a Condit- ional Use Permit for 'nstallation of this facility. Motion carried unanimously. SHOREWOOD NURSERY - G RY MINION - THREE PUBLIC HEARINGS 7:45 PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING REQUEST FROM R-5, MULTIPLE FAMILY TO R-C, RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL 8:00 PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO INCLUDE SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS IN THE R-C DISTRICT 8:15 PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - EXPANSION OF SHOREWOODNURSERY All three Public He rings were opened and kept open until the end, due to the fact that the discussion on all three issues would affect the final decision on each Hearing. Mr. Gary Minion was present to state that he had bought out lots A and B, plus the piece of property w st of the nursery with the red house standing on it. He stated that he would like 0: 1. move the existi g garage back, eliminating an eyesore. . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 1, 1983 page two 2. build a lath house to help shade nursery stock, consisting of a structure approximately 10 feet high, no sides, rough cedar horizontally on top, h~ld up by 4" x 4" beams. This would be built in the area currently occupied by the garage. He mentioned that a similar structure presently exists on his property and is available for inspection. 3. take the existing driveway entering on Smithtown Road, and have it exit at the rear of the property onto Wood Duck Circle because the current driveway is only wide enough for one car and most of the nursery stock is in the back of the property, making the exiting easier at the rear. 4. live upstairs in the red house and use the downstairs as an office and the kitchen for employees, or let one employee live there as one of the working benefits. (He stated that the house is presently under lease until September of 1984.) He also mentioned that he has already done landscaping on the outlots, and plans to do more, both on the outlots and the piece of property that the house stands upon, for a buffer and to improve the appearance. Planning Commission Discussion Building Setbacks were questioned. Planner Nielsen stated that with the additional property Mr. Minion has bought, he meets setback requirements. Driveway. Several members of the Commission expressed concern with a commercial driveway exiting onto a residential street. They discussed: - making it a one way, entering off Smithtown Road and exiting onto Wood Duck Circle. - Conditional Use Permit for a year, to be studied after that time. ~ - a cul-de-sac at the end, entering and exiting onto Smithtown Road. It was explained to Mr. Minion that, although the Commission did not see a problem with his particular request, they are setting a precident for kile situations, and as a result did not feel it was a wise move. They suggested that he widne present driveway and put a cul-de-sac at the South end. House. Commission felt that, although they did not mind Minion, or one of his employees living in the house as an accessory use, they would rather not add Single Family Dwellings to the R-C District. Planner Nielsen stated that the single family residence is not listed in any fashion as either permitted accessory or conditional use in the R-C District, therefore the ordinance would have to be amended. Mr. Minion questioned the fact that if it is legal to make it a duplex, why not a single? MOTIONS -Watten moved, seconded by Leslie, to approve the rezoning from R-5, Multiple Family, to R-C, Residential-Commercial. Roll Call Vote - Motion passed unanimously. -Watten moved, seconded by Spellman, to deny the request to amend the Zoning Ordinance to include single family dwellings as a permitted use in the R-C District. Roll Call Vote - Motion failed 2-5 (Watten and Spellman nay. . . ~ . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES NOVEMBER 1, 1983 page three MOTIONS continued-Shorewood Nursery -Watten moved, seconded by Spellman, that the ZoningOrdinace be amended to include caretaker residences as a Conditional Use in the R-C District subject to the following conditions: 1. Residences will be allowed only when accessory to the principal use of the property. 2. That the residence be occupied only by a caretaker for the premises and not rented out to someone who is not affiliated with the principal use of the property. Roll Call Vote - Motion passed unanimously. -Reese moved, seconded by Spellman, to approve the expansion of the Shorewood Nursery Conditional Use Permit subject to the following: 1. The service driveway from Smithtown Road to the rear of the property should not exit onto Wood Duck Circle. 2. The five recommendations in the Planner's Report dated 31 October 1983, should be complied with. Roll Call Vote - Motion passed unanimously. WHEELER AND ASSOCIATES - REQUEST FOR SETBACK VARIANCE - 28115 BOULDER BRIDGE DRIVE Mr. Wheeler was present to request a 30 foot rear yard setback to place an accessory pool house on his property. Reese moved, seconded by Benson, to allow a 30 foot rear yard setback. Motion carried unanimously. JAMES EMMER - REQUEST FOR SUBDIVISION AND VARIANCE - 5570 COVINGTON ROAD Mr. Emmer presented a request for a simple subdivision and a lot area variance that had been approved in 1982, because it was not filed with the County within 30 days it was considered void, so Mr. Emmer resubmitted his request. Benson moved, seconded by Shaw, to recommend approval of the subdivision and variance. Motion carried unanimously. HOWARD SHENEHON/MARY GOODLUND - REQUEST FOR SUBDIVISION AND VARIANCE - 5285 SHADY ISLAND ROAD Mr. Goodlund and Mr. Shenehon were present. Mr. Shenehon presented a copy of a plat map drawing showing that many of the lots on the island are small. Mr. Goodlund explained that there is a cottage on the middle lot, showing why they want 3 lots because of cottage location. He wants to build on the property next to the point, keeping point in its natural state. Mr. Shenehon wants the cottage. The Commission expressed concern over the 15 foot Lane that would serve the three lots. Mr. Shenehone pointed out that numerous other cities have narrow lanes serving homes in their areas. The Planning Commission questioned the r.o.w. Commissioner Spellman questioned a snowplowing problem. Planner Nielsen mentioned a 50 foot r.o.w. It was suggested that the City Engineer look at the r.o.w. and give an opinion. Watten moved, seconded by Leslie, to allow the request for a subdivision into 3 lots and approval of the variance. Motion carried by Roll Call Vote - Leslie, Shaw, Boyd, and Watten-aye, Reese, Spellman, and Benson-nay. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES NOVEMBER 1, 1983 page four CHAMPION AUTO STORE - KENNETH GRIFFITHS - 23714 STATE HIGHWAY 7 Mr. Kenneth Griffiths was present to request a sign variance. He explained that the submitted design was one of their standard designs, and felt it was similar to the one used by the Shorewood Liquor Store. Leslie moved, seconded by Reese, to deny the request for a sign variance. Motion carried unanimously. COVINGTON VINE RIDGE - NORTHWEST CORNER - INTERSECTION OF COVINGTON ROAD AND VINE ST. Mr. Rick Sathre of Sathre/Berquist gave a presentation to the Commission, explain- ing that he's had several discussions with Planner Nielsen and that they are seeking direction from the Commission. Proposal - P.U.D. The property located at the N.W. corner of the intersection of Covington Road and Vine Street is a rolling, partly wooded area with wetlands, knolls and ridges. Their idea is to work with the terrain and environment, and keep the area as natural as possible. -42 acres/64 lots -1.5 dwellings per acre-gross density -2.72 dwellings per acre net density including wetlands -minimum lot size 8450 square feet -maximum lot size slightly over 1700 square feet -Lots 8000 to 9000 square feet - the wetlands were not included when they figured the number of lots, but were included with individual lots to avoid the possibil- ity of tax delinquency, or other problems. Goals #1 Quality Single Family Homes -character and detail not usually found in smaller units -modest in size -reasonable price - $80,000 and up -design prospect carried a step further than usual -privacy -asthetics from larger units put into smaller homes -utilizing interior space, still giving as muCh.spaciousmess as possible -designed for young perple and empty nesters #2 Affordable land/structure package -smaller lots -landscaping: completely landscaped-shrubs, retaining walls, decks, etc. -comfortable and servicable yards #3 A Phased Development -due to finances they would be looking at dev~loping in segments -owners wish to sell property and feel by est4blishing covenants, they will be able to control one or several builders #4 Home Construction to begin in 1984 #5 Density to be concentrated within -clustering effect on knoll in center of prop rty, larger lots on perimeter #6 Preservation of Woodline Buffer -only thinning dead, sideased and overcrowded vegetation . . . PARK COMMISSION MEETING NOVEMBER 1, 1983 page five #7 Preservation of wet14nds #8 A Project reflecting the good taste and standards of Shorewood Parks 1. Far Northwest corner of property - 1.6 acres - 20 foot walkway to park from public roadway. 2. North from Covington Road (south side of private property that cuts into this piece) 1.9 acres. Mr. Sathre mentioned that Peter Pflaum is building a similar project in Chanhassen on Townline Road and 101, and suggested that Commission might like to look at same in the Spring when they start building. He told Commission that they've held 3 meetings with Minnetonka and Shorewood residents, explaining what they are doing and answering questions. He felt that the meetings went well. He explained their reason for coming to the Commission and presenting the booklet and proposals is to request a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to allow for greater density and smaller lots, and present tasteful but affordable homes. Commissioner Watten complemented them on their presentation, saying it was very comprehensive, that he liked the mix in houses, and he felt they'd shown several desirable aspects. Cul-de-sac Planner Nielsen mentioned that cul-de-sacs as long as 2000 feet are allowed but would not suggest over 700 feet. Mr. Sathre said this particular cul-de-sac (top one on plan) would be 1320 to 1500 feet long. His reasons for using cul-de-sacs were: -safer for children -higher lot prices available -cuts down on burgulary -didn't want to disturb wetlands by cutting through them Commission discussed: -snowplowing problems -school bus problems -emergency vehicle problems Mr. Sathre said they were certainly open to considering other possibilities. He ask what the next step is and was told the first step is to apply for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Planner Nielsen suggested staff meet with developers and discuss potential concerns either staff or developer may have, and make up a list of concerns or questions that may be explored by the Planning Commission at a later date. ECHO ROAD - COMPLAINTS Win Kohls complained about junk cars. Planner Nielsen stated that he had talked to her and explained that the current ordinance does not address the problems, only that cars must be licensed. He told her imput would be welcome. She went around and talked to her neighbors to get their viewpoints. Planner Nielsen said the new ordinance will be more specific. He also invited Council and Commission to drop in and examine the complaint file. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 1, 1983 Page Six . REPORTS Council Liaison Tad Shaw reported on the following: (Meeting of October 24, 1983) Ron Kokesh - 26260 Birch Bluff Road - accepted as changed due to neighbor opposition to original request. Lake Virginia Lift Station - C.U.P. approved Henry Arent - 4812 Ferncroft Drive - Variance denied 5-0 Richard Smith - 5860 Ridge Road - Simple Subdivision approved Northwest A.M.P.S. - Zoning Ordinance Amendment passed 4-1, will be back Jim Beal - presented "Citizen's Notice" Comprehensive Plan Amendment - second draft accepted as administrative policy, to be reviewed in a years time Insurance - Council accepted a Bloomington agent, bringing a significant savings to the City with an improved package and more and better coverage for the City. ADJOURNMENT . Watten moved, seconded by Benson, to adjourn at 10:40 PM. Motion carried unanimously. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, ~ S J l.f2 11J..ec..un1D SUE NICCUM, DEPUTY CLERK . . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, DECEMBER 6, 1983 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:30 PM M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER Chairman Benson called the December 6, 1983 Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:50 PM. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Bruce Benson, Janet Leslie, Vern Wattern, Richard Spellman (7:50), Bob Shaw (7:50), Frank Reese (8:00); Planner Brad Nielsen; Acting Council Liaisons Bob Gagne and Jan Haugen, Deputy Clerk Sue Niccum. Absent: Commissioner Mary Boyd. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Leslie moved, Watten seconded, to approve the November 1, 1983 Minutes as written. MARION JOHNSON - 5915 STRAWBERRY LANE - SIMPLE SUBDIVISION Marion Johnson appeared to state that her driveway extends 10 feet onto her neighbor's property. The neighbor has agreed to sell her a 10' x 100' strip so that the dDivewaywil1 not have to be moved. The zoning requirements will still be met. Planner Nielsen explained that this was a boundary dispute which had gone to court where the Judge told them to settle it. Watten moved, seconded by Leslie, to recommend to the Council to approve the simple subdivision. Motion carried unanimously. 7:45 PM PUBLIC HEARING - VINE HILL FLORIST - VERN CARLSON - REZONING REQUEST FROM C-3, GENERAL COMMERCIAL AND R-l, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDNEITAL TO C-3, GENERAL COMMERCIAL Chairman Benson began the Hearing by reading the legal notice. Mr. and Mrs. Vernon Carlson were present, Planner Nielsen explained the previous history, explaining that it had been presented to the Planning Commission originally in April of 1982 but was not pursued to it's conclusion. This situation evolved because of a City error, not uncommon on older zoning maps. He said the correct legal description has now been received so the property can be rezoned. No one in the audience had any comments. Leslie moved, seconded by Spellman, to recommend to the Council to approve the rezoning of the property. Motion carried by Roll Call vote. (Leslie, Spellman, Benson and Watten) . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, DECEMBER 6, 1983 Page Two LEO HOFFMAN - 28100 BOULDER BRIDGE DRIVE - REQUEST FOR SETBACK VARIANCE Mr. Leo Hoffman and Mr. Tom Wartman were present. Mr. Wartman explained to Commission that when Boulder Bridge - Phase I - was developed the cul-de-sac was much shorter, the night of final approval before the Council the road was drawn in as shown, and no consideration was given to the area left to build upon. They plan to build the garage facing S.E. onto Boulder Bridge Drive with the back of the garage facing the cul-de-sac. Shrubbery screening is proposed behind the garage. He felt that alternative numbers 2, 3, and 4 of the Planner's Report would present an undue hardship, one of the reasons being the grading problem4Planner Nielsen asked Mr. Wartman what the grade is with the garage at 50 feet. Upon being told 7%, Planner Nielsen said he would not want the grade any steeper. Commission discussed Woodside Road being a substandard 33 feet instead of 50 feet. Planner mentioned the possibility of picking up 17 feet from the west side when it is developed. Watten moved, seconded by Spellman, to recommend to the Council to approve the request for a Setback Variance allowing the garage to be 20 feet from Woodside Rd. Motion carried unanimously. 8:15 PM PUBLIC HEARING - NEW VECTOR INC. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS NORTHWEST AMPS) - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Mr. Tom Harraka was present to discuss construction of a telephone switch station and accessory antenna at 24285 Smithtown Road. Hearing opened for public comment, and closed to public with no comment. Shaw moved, seconded by Leslie, to recommend to the Council to approve the Conditional Use Permit subject to the recommendations of the Planner and the conditions of Ordinance 150. Motion carried unanimously. PARK COMMISSION REPORT Council Liaison Gagne reported that St. John's Preserve and Covington-Vine Ridge were asked for financial compensation, rather than parkland, at the December 5, 1983 Park Commission Meeting. 8:30 PM PUBLIC HEARING - COVINGTON-VINE RIDGE - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT Mr. Eric Canton reviewed their plans for Covington-Vine Ridge for the Commission. A change in the wetlands was introduced, it is now an Outlot instead of being divided among the platted lots. They propose an "Architectural Design Review Board" to deal with control of development. They pointed out the fact that the City now receives taxes of $160Q for undeveloped land but at an average of $90,00~ a home they would receive approximately $18,656. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, DECEMBER 6, 1983 Page Three The only comment from the audience came from Mr. Wallace Dayton. He hopes the Planning Commission considers the fact that there will be several projects developing in this area and he hopes they consider these as a whole so that the decision made on Covington-Vine Ridge will not interfere with the others. Public portion closed to public. Commission had questions on what a P.U.D. consists of. Planner Nielsen read Ordinance' 122 to them and said that C.V.R. already has several P.U.D. requirements: 1. Common open areas 2. Phasing of project 3. Outlot in concept 4. Home Owner's Association 5. Architectural Review Board Commission decided they could not make a determination until all staff reports were submitted and comments from outside agencies had been reviewed. Shaw moved, Benson seconded, tabling, until information is all in, until the Study Session Meeting January 17, 1983. Roll Call Vote (Leslie, Reese, Spellman - nay) - (Shaw, Benson, Watten - aye). Motion failed. Watten moved, seconded by Spellman, to table the Covington-Vine Ridge Comprehensive Plan Amendment until the January 3, 1983 meeting. Roll Call Vote (Shaw, Benson, Watten, Leslie, Reese, Spellman - aye). Motion carried unanimously. 8:45 PM PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY PLAT - GARY MINION - SOUTHWEST QUADRANT OF BRACKETT'S AND APPLE ROADS Chairman Benson read legal notice. Hearing opened at 10:00 PM. Mr. Minion made a presentation, he has a 13 acre parcel of land he wants to divide into 11 lots. This to be done in two stages, the six lots in Blocks 1 and 2 to be developed first, with Block 3 to be handled later. He did mention that Block 3 may be kept in one parcel to be used as a hobby farm, but he has no plans to develop it at this time. Approximately 5.48 acres is designated as wetland. The proposed plat meets R-2 zoning requirements. Several neighbors were present to ask questions. Sue Lang - 6090 Apple Road, said she and Sid James live in the lowest area and expressed concern oyer water being channeled into their area. Don Huntington - asked about flooding and fill. Bob Hoban - asked if the U.S. Corp of Engineers and Minnehaha Watershed District have been notified. Chairman Benson informed him the Watershed District has sent a letter of interest in the project. Joe Garaghty - was concerned about culvert backup flooding his lot. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, DECEMBER &, 1983 Page Four Don Huntington, Sue Lang, Sid James, John Sayer, and Joe Garaghty - all wished to know, if Mr. Minion ran water from Woodhaven II to his lots, if they would be assessed. Public portion of Hearing was closed at 10:30 PM. Planner Nielsen said the run-off from the project would be calculated to see if the wetlands could handle it, and that both the Engineer and the Watershed District would be involved. Watten moved, seconded by Reese, to recommend to the Council to accept the preliminary plat subject to and contingent on the 5 recommendations in the Planner's Report; also that when the final plat comes back through the Planning Commission, neighbors are notified. Roll Call Vote - unanimous (Boyd absent). Reese moved, Watten seconded, to recommend to Council that they look at a possible extension water from Woodhaven II as shown on the preliminary plat. Roll Call Vote (Benson, Leslie, Watten, Spellman, Reese - aye) - (Shaw - abstain). RUDOLPH MILLER - 26710 EDGEWOOD ROAD - REQUEST FOR SETBACK VARIANCE Mr. Mikkelson, Contractor for Mr. Miller, asked for a Setback Variance for a tennis court, stating that Mr. Miller would have to cut down three trees in order to conform. He said there are other tennis courts on Edgewood that are not 50 feet back, and also a home with a 32 foot setback. Acting Council Liaison Haugen said she believed that home had been there before the zoning setback was passed. He said the chain link fence would be coated with black or green vinyl and the court and fence would be constructed of only the finest material. Mr. Miller does not intend to have a windscreen. Reese moved, Spellman seconded, to recommend that the Council deny the setback variance because the loss of relatively few Elm trees did not constitute a hardship, particularly in view of the size of the property. Roll Call Vote. Motion carried unanimously. MATTERS FROM FLOOR None PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - DECEMBER 20, 1983 Watten moved, Shaw seconded, to cancel the December 20, 1983 Planning Commission Meeting. Motion carried unanimously. ADJOURNMENT Leslie moved, seconded by Benson, to adjourn at 10:55 PM. Motion carried unanimously. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, SUE NICCUM, DEPUTY CLERK SN:pr