The URL can be used to link to this page

1985 pl mn . . . COUNCIL CHAM8ERS 5755 COUNTRY~ CLUB ROAD 7 : 30 PM I ! CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, JANUARY 8, 1985 M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Janet Leslie called the meeting to order at 7:40 PM. ROLL CALL I Chairperson Leslie, Commissioners Benson, Schultz, Boy~, Spellman (7:45) and Watten (7:45); Planner Nielsen; Council Li~ison Stover and Deputy Clerk Niccum. Present: Absent: Commissioner Reese (called/ill) APPROVAL OF MINUTES Schultz moved, Benson seconded, to approve the minutes of December written. Motion carried unanimously. VARIANCE TO EXPAND A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE - Orville Hastin s - 5495 Radisson Entra ce 18th as I I Mr. Hastings appeared t.o request a permit to build a two-story add~tion on the north side of his home. He said he was given a variance in 1911 in order to meet the 50 foot lake setback. i i IMr. Hastings h least 25 feet. Commissioner Schultz asked how close he is to the north lot line. said he thought approximately 30 feet. Planner Nielsen said it's Mr. Hastings said he also owns the lot between his lot and Highway!7 to the north. Commissioner Schultz asked what the zoning for future use of this lot. is, ! and what Mr. Hastin$s plans are Mr. Hastings said it is zoned R-1. He said the person he bought t*e lot from used it as a buffer between his home and Highway 7, and that as 10fg as he owns the property, he intends to use it for the same purpose. He also $aid the lot is large enough to build upon but due to the topography in relatiot to the sewer line, the lot may be unbuildable. I i Schultz moved, Boyd seconded, to recommend to Council to approve tte variance to expand a nonconforming structure. Motion carried unanimously. STUDY SESSION Commission reviewed the old and new zoning ordinances relative to zoning requirements. Items discussed were: 1. Elements of design 2. Curbing - specific types 3. Trash control 4. Metal buildings 5. Signs I fommercial I .:/ t:;,. . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, JANUARY 8, 1985 page two SrQDY SESSION - Continued Planner Nielsen will present slides showing positive and negative commercial development zoning at the January 22nd meeting. REPORTS examples of Council - given by Council Liaison Stover Parks - given by Deputy Clerk Niccum NEXT MEETING ADJOURNMENT January 22nd - Study session Benson moved, Boyd seconded, to adjourn at 9:25 PM. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED Sue Niccum Deputy Clerk / ., '~."" ~f . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 1985 COUNC 5755 7:30 ROAD M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER Chair Janet Leslie called the meeting to order at 7:42 PM. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Leslie, Commissioners Reese, Benson, Schultz and Spellman (8:00); Council Liaison Stover; Planner Nielsen and Deputy Clerk Niccum Absent: Commissioners Boyd (excused/child ill) and Watten ( id not call) APPROVAL OF MINUTES Schultz moved, Benson seconded, to approve the minutes as unanimously. I writter' I Motion carried 7:30 PUBLIC HEARING - SILVER RIDGE P.U.D. - CONCEPT STAGE ! Mr. Jim Bruce of Bruce Construction Company was present to discubs the development of approximately 15.4 acres of land located south of Covington Rfad along the east and west sides of Ridge Road. ! There will be 10 buildable lots, three of which, including the eFisting residence, will be lakeshore lot~ along with Outlot A (tennis court, for us~ by 5 lots in Block 1 only, to be maintained by Homeowner's Association fees a d accessible only on foot, no parking lot) and Outlot B (unbuildable, to be u ed for private driveway, between two rows of mature pine trees, to service Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 2, with a possibility of adding a fourth if Mr. McCarthy erer develops a lot to the south;. Mr. Bruce said they are carefully considering each site individu lly. Mary Jo Roberts - 5640 Covington Road Q. Where will you get water? A. Either private wells or Trivesco. Q. Will it be possible for me to hook up? I would like to have'water. A. It will depend upon which way we go and how many people woul be interested if a line is run down Covington Road. Walter Roberts - 5640 Covington Road Q. A. Would sewer from Lot 1, Block 1, go down to the lake? I Yes, there is a manhole down there, we willatte~pt to negoti~te an easement with you. There is sewer on Ridge Road but because of the e~evation, this would he preferable. I I . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 1985 page two Public portion of the hearing was closed at 8:22 PM. I I I I I I importantl he would hate The Commission discussed: Private driveway - Outlot B Private driveway vs. dedicated right-of-way. Mr. Bruce feels that the character of the driveway is to see it changed in the future. I I Commissioner Spellman emphatically feels that it should be a deficated of-way. I Planner Nielsen suggested having the City Attorney look at the fssue. The question of a T or Y turnaround or a cul-de-sac was also difcussed. I right- I I Commissioner Leslie asked if the wetlands are included in the lr. t size. Mr. Bruce said he didn't know but he would check on it. He said he didn't see any problem, either way, in meeting building requirements. ! I Wetlands Setbacks Setbacks on Lot 5, Block 1, and Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 2 were mfntioned. Variations or trade-offs were discussed on the latter 3 lots. rommiSSion feels the lots should be visited and an elevation should be est blished below which no structures could be built on Lots 1-3, Block 2. Driveway servicing Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 2 I Commission discussed whether the proposed driveway entry for LOfS 1-3, Block 2, was in the best location. Mr. Bruce said the driveway already xists, running down to the barn on Lot 3, Block 2. ! I I I ! I . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 1985 page three Benson moved, Reese seconded, to recommend to Council to accept the Concept Stage of Silver Ridge P.U.D. with the following conditions: 1. The attorney will be consulted regarding the driveway on utlot B, private drive vs. right-of-way. a. Private Roads - the developer should incorporate a cl tective covenants stating that future owners would be City will not maintain or take over any private road as it is brought up to City standards. 2. Variations or trade-offs on Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 2 may accepted. 3. The following Planner's suggestions and recommendations a e to be followed: use into his pro- aware that the ntil such time b. revie~ and approval stage lof the P.U.D. a tur 'around at the south Entry Plans for Outlot B - should be subject to by the City Engineer as part of the development c. Turnaround - there should be some provision for end of Outlot B. d. Lots 4 and 5 - Block 1 - if driveway grades of less t an 10-12 percent can't be achieved on these lots, parking areas large e ough for two cars will be required at the top of each lot. e. Lots 1, 2 and 3 - Block 2 - The wetland area should an outlot and the City should require a drainage or ment over it. beldesignated as c01 servation ease- f. It is suggested that the setback adjacent to the east side of the private road should be reduced to either 25 or 30 feet. In trade for this advantage the City should prohibit any struct res below a certain elevation. This elevation will be determined pon field inspection of the site. It is recommended that no structures should be allowedl within the narrow part of Lot 2, Block 2. I I I shouldl_be eliminated. an easrment so that the I g. h. The panhandle containing the driveway for Lot 3 The driveway can just as easily be provided via 50 foot setback on Lot 2 can be maintained. i. I The existing outbuildings on Lot 3 may be allowed to b~ maintained in their current location but they should be treated as n nconforming structures as far as expansion or structural change is concerned. The required rear yard should be reduced to increase the b ildable area of the lot. As mentioned previously, this could be trade fora restriction on buildings below a determined elevation. j . Lots 4 and 5 - Block 2 - Driveways should be limited t Onsite turnarounds, as shown on the developer's concep required to avoid backing onto the street. one for each lot. plan, should be . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 1985 page four Engineer's Concerns - Lot 3, Block 1, will require a sewer asement from the property to the south in order to tie into the existing main on Ridge Road. Motion carried by roll call vote - 5 ayes - Leslie, Reese, Spel man, Schultz and Benson. STUDY SESSION - ZONING ORDINANCE Planner Nielsen showed slides with positive and negative development. Some of the specific items discussed were: metal buildings landscaping examp l , I of commercial grassy areas and berms between parking areas and streets parking lots - striping and curbing signage - architecture City of Shorewood setting a better example on City-owned ftcilitie' MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR none REPORTS Council Report - given by Council Liaison Stover Park Commission Report - given by Deputy Clerk Niccum ADJOURNMENT Benson moved, Reese seconded, to adjourn at 10:27 PM. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED Sue Niccum Deputy Clerk . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, MARCH 5, 1985 COUNCIL CH,t,MBERS 5755 COUNT,Y CLUB ROAD 7:30 PM ' M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER Chair Leslie called the meeting to order at 7:40 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Leslie, Commissioners Boyd, Reese, Benson and Schultz; Planner Nielsen; Council Liaison Stover and Deputy Clerk Niccum Absent: Commissioners Watten (Business meeting - arrived 8:30 PM) and Spellman (Hawaii) APPROVAL OF MINUTES Schultz moved, Benson seconded, to approve the minutes of February 5 as written. Motion carried unanimously. VARIANCE REQUEST - EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE Mr. Thomas Gerald Hayes of 5550 Shore Road was present to explain that he wants to improve this property (now a rental) as he wishes to make it his permanent residence. He wants to add a 26' x 26' double garage, which he feels is necessary in this climate; a covered porch giving access from the garage to the house; and a deck. Q. Boyd - How close would the garage be to the asphalt? A. Hayes - I measured 33' from the house to the asphalt, which m~kes it 7'. Q. Schultz - questioned the width of the garage. A. Hayes - room needed to get around car when getting in and out. Q. Benson - questioned length of garage. A. Hayes - Architect drew plans, extending the roof line to be a~thetica+ly pleasing to the eye. He would prefer 26' but would SEttle for 24'. Planner Nielsen - the Building Code will affect the length. . Mr~ Hayes explained that Lot 11 to the west is vacant and Lot 5 td the east is a summer residence owned by his sisters. The two lots are the on 'y ones served by Shore Road (Garden Lane). He was the one that originally requE sted the tarring of the road, which extends to the west end of his property, and m, intains it and plows it per an agreement with the City. Planner Nielsen said the deck meets setback requirements. He als( said he has no problem with the porch. . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, MARCH 5, 1985 page two Mr. David Walker of 20485 Radisson Inn Road (Lot 6) said that he h s spoken with the owners of both Lot 7 and Lot 8. These are the three homes that are on the north side of Shore Road (Garden Lane), and the ones that would be affected by this. The above 3 property owners, according to Mr. Walker, have 0 objections to the improvements and feel that it would be a step up from the present rental. He also said he had no objections to a 26' garage. Schultz moved, Benson seconded, to recommend to Council to approve ity with the Planner's recommendations thaE~1) The applicant be re an up-to-date survey showing the precise loca~ion.aQd configuratio ing structure and proposed additions; and 2) improved off street p accommodate two cars. Also that the garage be 24' in depth (N to be considered a hardship because of 1) the clim~te and 2) special consider the fact that the neighbors involved favor his plans. Mo roll call vote - 4 ayes (Benson, Schultz, Boyd and Leslie, 1 nay - the nonconform- uired to submit of the exist- rking space to S). That this eeds of applicant, & ion carried by Reese. Mr. Joe Gorecki of 26890 Edgewood Road said he men involved but he had recently spent time in would be better. did not know either'l of the a wheelchair and felt that i gentle- 26' Leslie said that she understood that it was the depth, rather than the length, that affected this issue. SIMPLE SUBDIVISION Mr. Joe Gorecki was present to represent Mr. Robert Reutiman. Planner NIelsen said he is concerned about the access. He request d Mr. Gorecki to present him with a grading plan of the entire subdivision, show"ng how the driveway(s) is planned so that he and the City Engineer can study he grading and access. Benson moved, Reese seconded, to table the Simple Subdivision until the Study Session meeting of March 19th, if the grading plans have been rece"ved and studied by that time. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR Schultz suggested that the Park Dedication Fee be studied. REPORTS Council Liaison Stover reported on the Council meeting. Deputy Clerk Niccum reported that the Park Commission meeting was the weather. ADJOURNMENT ~ Benson moved, Reese seconded, to adjourn at 9:00 PM. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED Sue Niccum, Deputy Clerk i i iancened ! due to . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, APRIL 2, 1985 COUNiIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:30 PM M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER Chair Leslie called the meeting to order at 7:45 PM. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Les lie, commi. s.sioners Reese,.. Benson and Spellmaf; Planner Nielsen; Council 1iaison Stover and Deputy Clerk Nicium. Commissioners Boyd, Schultz and Wa~ten (all were excu ed) Absent: APPROVAL OF MINUTES , Reese moved, Benson seconded, to approve the minutes of March 5, 985 as written. Motion carried unanimously. DEVELOPMENT STAGE APPROVAL - SILVER RIDGE P.U.D. Mr. Jim Bruce was present to state that he generally agrees with Engineer's recommendations. He did wish to request that the City the intent for Outlot B is to keep it as a private driveway, as n and that the only reason it was done as an Outlot is to eventuall neighbor to the South. He also asked the City to make a request that they grant permission for Silver Ridge to connect to their M Commissioner Benson asked him if he had any problem with the 16' road. Mr. Bruce said he would prefer a narrower width, wishing t naturally as a private drive, but would go along with it if neces he Planner's and keep in mind that tural as possible, benefit the o the MWCC, asking tro sewer line. idth on the private maintain it more Relative to the Engineer's concern with drainage, Chair Leslie as ed Mr. Bruce if he planned to have curbing. Mr. Bruce said he was not interested in curbing as he did not feel there was a need for it because the street water runoff Os minimal. Chair Leslie questioned the affect of the old Covington Road r.o. . alignment on Lot 3, Block 2. Planner Nielsen explained that the old r.o.w. stOll exists and reduces the buildable area of the lot. Since the Engineer recomm nds keeping the existing r.o.w. because of the sewer line located there, it is re ommended that the setback for Lot 3 be adjusted to reflect the new Covington Ro d alignment. Reese moved, Benson seconded, to recommend to Council to approve Stage and Preliminary Plat subject to the recommendations of the Engineer: 2. he Development lanner and the . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, APRIL 2, 1985 page two 3. Designate~wetland. The de.oloper has made the desilnated ~tland an outlot (O.L. C). As part of the final plasa conservation easement tver the wetland must be dedicated to the City. ! Covington Road realignment. The setback for Lot 3 Block 2 $hould be based upon the new Covington Road alignment as shown on Exhibit B ot the Planner's Report (March 29, 1985). I 4. 5. Watershed approval. ations. Plat approval should be subject to Wattrshed recommend- 6. Engineer recommendation. Detailed plans and specifications for the streets and utilities should be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. Motion carried by Roll Call vote - 4 ayes - Benson, Reese, Leslie and Spellman 7:45 PUBLIC HEARING - WESTLAWN TWO I Mr. George Larson's Engineer, Mr. Mark Gronberg, was presenttQ retuest Preliminary Plat approval. The site is approximately 15.9 acres, currently z ned R-1, Single Family Residential. Mr. Larson's request is to subdivide only th four lots on Smithtown Road at this time. Marion Johnson - 5915 Strawberry Lane was concerned about the dra to know if there could be any special provisions made on Mr. Lars street, such as enlarging the ditch that runs down the east side nage, and wanted n's side of the f Strawberry Lane. Planner Nielsen read the Engineer's Report, explaining that the E gineer has recom- mended that the drainage go to the west and showed a plan of the roposed drainage to the west. Marion Johnson also asked that it be recorded that she did not fe I that the "general public" should be assessed for the storm sewers. i i Don Mullenbach - 5830 Strawberry Lane asked how far the storm sewrr would run from Smithtown Road. Planner Nielsen said it would run across the back (south) of the roposed plat, a distance of approximately 900 feet. ! The public portion of the hearing was closed at 8:11 PM. Commissioner Spellman asked if financing the storm sewer is a con ideration of the plat approval. Planner Nielsen said no, that the financing would be handled duri g the final plat of the second phase. I Benson. moved, Spellman seconded, to recommend to Council that thef approve the Preliminary Plat for the four lots on Smithtown Road subject to t e Planner's and Engineer's recommendations: 1. Street design, grading, drainage and utilities should be subjfct to the recom- mendations of the City Engineer. Drainage will also be SUbjert to review and comment by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, APRIL 2, 1985 page three 2. The foot drainage and utility easements should be provided on each side of each side and rear lot line. to the reco_ndation of thr Park 3. Park dedication should be subject Commission. Motion carried unanimously. 8:00 PUBLIC HEARING - LAN-DE-CON Mr. Mark Laberee, President of Lan-De-Con, Inc. appeared before t present his request for a Conditional Use Permit (C.U.P.) to put He said he felt that it would definitely improve the property for they would plant a heavy band of evergreen trees along Highway 7, other trees when they develop the property, and that nicely woode more valuable. He said the property would not be used as a nurse growing purposes. There will not be any outside storage. They p on State Highway 7 (They are already working with MnDOT on this), on Eureka Road. The Eureka Road entrance would not have any truc e Commission to n a tree farm. future use, as besides leaving property is y but only for opose one entrance and also an entrance traffic. Walter Bloomgren - 25480 State Highway 7, also speaking for his w'fe and daughter, stated that the tree farm has already been in business for a year He said big trailers would come in and it has been a big business. He said a ter looking over the plans he would not object too much, but was definitely a ainst the Eureka Road entrance. Regarding the Highway 7 entrance, he said that th Eureka Road/ Highway 7 intersection is a bad intersection and there have been any accidents there. Mark Laberee said that he had originally talked to someone at Cit apparently talked to the wrong people, bcc,s.use he thought he had that time. He said he did store trees for other companies at the what caused the traffic and noise. He said this would no longer Hall, and had ermission at<:1 time and that was ake place. Jack Hendrickson - 6065 Eureka Road said he liked the idea, and f It it would be an improvement to the neighborhood, but that he did object to the Eu eka Road Entrance. The public portion of the hearing was closed at 8:27 PM. Commissioner Benson asked if it would be a retail operation. Mr. Laberee said no; it would be strictly a growing area. Chair Leslie asked how much traffic would be generated. I Mr. Laberee.aid there would be someone in and out approximately ~wice a day in the Spring and approximately twice a week in the Summer to water and fultivate the trees. Spellman moved, Reese seconded, to recommend to Council that theyl approve the Conditional Use Permit with the condition that no entrance onto Efreka Road be allowed, and that the following Planner's recommendations be comPllied with: 1. The three parcels be combined into one. I I 2. The property is to be used only for the growing of landscape stock. No retail sales activity is allowed. . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, APRIL 2, 1985 page four, 3. The evergreen landscape buffer should be planted immediately. Consideration should be given to planting larger trees (4-6 feet high) adjacent to adjoining residences. The impact of vehicular traffic on adjoining streets and reSiiences should be minimized as follows: a. Limit hours of operation from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. b. Require that trucks use only the Highway 7 access drive. c. Access from Highway 7 will require approval from the Minnesota Department of Transportation. 4. 5. No encroachment should be allowed into the designated wetland on the north side of the site. Permanent stakes or a fence should be placed alcng the edge of the wetland area. 6. The applicant should indicate what, if any, outdoor storage will take place On the site. Areas for such storage, if allowed, should be specified on the site plan and screened from view of the adjoining properties. 7. Any onsite storage of equipment should take place with a small accessory build- ing, built in compliance with the State Building Code. Signage on the site should be limited to an address sign (POSSr'blY with a small nameplate), and signs ffildnr:iiai:ent to control traffic as recommen ed in item 4., above. . Motion carried unanimously. . 8. SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST - MICHAEL HALLEY - 24000 STRATFORD PLACE Applicant requested postponement. SIMPLE SUBDIVISION/VARIANCE REQUEST - RALPH ROBINSON - 28190 WOODS DE ROAD Mr. Robinson requested dividing his property into three lots. Thi submitted by Donald K. Rippel in 1979 and approved by the City Cou has to be reprocessed as a new request because the division was no same request was cil in 1980. It recorded. Reese moved, Benson seconded, to recommend to Council that they ap Subdivision/Variance Request subject to the Planner's recommendati dedication fees ($500 each for two lots) be paid along with the Ci expenses for processing the request. Motion carried unanimously. rove the Simple n that park y's previous MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR none REPORTS Council Liaison Stover reported on the Council meeting. ADJOURNMENT Benson moved, Leslie seconded, to adjourn at 9.00 PM. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED Sue Niccum, Deputy Clerk SN:sn . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD [PLANNING COMMISSION] JOINT: [CITY COUNCIL MEETING] MONDAY, APRIL 29, 1985 I I COUNCIL CHfERS 5755 COUNTR CLUB ROAD 7:30 PM I M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER Mayor Rascop called the meeting to order at 7:30 PM. ROLL CALL Present: Council: Mayor Rascop, Councilmembers Shaw, Haugen, Gagn and Stover. Planning Commission: Commissioners Spellman and Schultz I blerk ! Niccum. Staff: Planner Nielsen, Administrator Vogt and Deputy Absent: Planning Commission: Chailirman Leslie (excused), Commissioners Boyd, feese, Benson and Watten. SHOREWOOD ZONING ORDINANCE REVIEW Planner Nielsen reviewed the proposed new Zoning Ordinance as fo lows: The current Zoning Ordinance was adopted in 1973, has been amend d approximately 35 times, and is outdated. There are threecbasic parts 'to the new Ordinance: I. General Provisions II. Administrative III. Establishment of Zoning Districts III. Establishment of Zoning Districts This divides the community into various use districts. Each zon ng district has a section within the Ordinance specifying the regulations for t t district. Permitted uses - principal uses of property which have been acceptable in the district where they are located. Any use allowed. determined to be listed is not Accessary uses - activities secondary to the principal use of ~he site. I I . . . CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JOINT MEETING OF MONDAY, APRIL 29, 1985 page two Conditional uses - activities which may be acceptable within algiven area under certain specific conditions. Conditional Use Permits (C.U.P.'s) require a public hearing, Planning Commission review, and Cou cil approval. Lot sizes and setbacks Structure height Proposed Changes: Residential District names to: R-1...........single family R-2...........single and two-family R-3...........multiple family Letters indicate intensity: R-1A..........40,000 square feet R-1B..........30,000 square feet (new) R-1C..........20,000 square feet R-1D..........10,000 square feet (new) I i I permit~ . ! I Setbac~ from shorelIne I I C-1 District - intensity reduced - more Conditional Use Zoning Map - few changes Shoreland Regulations are incorporated into ordinance. increases from 50 feet to 75 feet. Audience Response Eileen Hassel - EdinaiRealty, 1120 Wayzata Blvd~, Wayzata and 5330 Howards Point Road - Mrs. Ridinger divided 5330 Howards two lots recently. She and Ms. Hassel, her real estate agent, concern and anger, stating that the new shoreline setback (75 with road and side setbacks, will make an expensive lakeshore and wanted to know why they had not been informed of this chan property was divided. i rginiac II Ridinger- oint Road into expressed deep eet), along ot unbuildable, e when the Mayor Rascop Explained that due to a new stricter state regula ion, the change to 75 feet is mandatory, and that Planner Nielsen did not have this information at the time the property was divided. Planner Nielsen suggested that Ms. Hassel and Mrs. Ridinger me see what can be done. with him to Larry Samuelson asked that the R-1D District be expanded to Gl~ncoe Road, to include the property at 5865 Glencoe Road (see Exhibit A - att~ched). I I I I i I . . . I I I I , James Robin - 23420 Park Street also asked that the R-1D Distrf'ct be expanded to Glencoe Road, to include Lots 4 through 9 in the west end 0 Balls Addition. Nicholas Ruehl - 456 LaFayette Avenue said he has a problem Wi!h "C-4" Commercial Service District (Subd 2.e. "Enclosed boat and mari e sales"). - 450 Lake Street were both concerned bout the possibility of more boat traffic and increased weekend activit. Both men spoke favorably of Mick Niccum's Dredging Company, saying they would like to see the zoning. help Mr. Niccum, as he was trying to improve his property. was also concerned about possible traffic inc ease if a marina would ever come. into the area, saying most people take he "back way", as entering County Road 19 is difficult. He feels that the ne C-4 zoning is too confining for the businesses on the south side of Count Road 19. CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JOINT MEETING OF MONDAY, APRIL 29, 1985 page three I said he would rather see Mr. Niccum's "Grandffther clause" be extended in 1990. I i Planner Nielsen said Mr. Niccum would not be able to improve ot expand under these conditions. Nicolas Ruehl and. want the Council to do whotver necessary to help Mr. Niccum but would like to see III 36 Subd.2.e. remoted from the Ordinance. I Planner Nielsen suggested, and the Council agreed, that c-4 zorl ing be taken under advisement and studied further. Part II - General Provisions I This contains performance standards that may apply to several orlall of the zoning districts. It contains: I I Definitions of words and terms used within the Ordinance ! I m~et I I i Nonconformities - Deals with uses or structures which do not zoning standards. current . . . CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JOINT MEETING OF MONDAY, APRIL 29. 1985 page four Fences Screening and landscaping Junk - cars and other junk storage. Parking - both street and private property. Building Construction Requirements - m1n1mum requirements for construction. Also addresses mobile homes; an~ prohibits meta on nonresidential property. esidential buildings Home Occupations - will require either limited or special perm ts. The City may wish to prohibit auto repair. I Audience Response I Kare.n Siegman - 5775 Echo Road mentioned rental problems regar ing motors hanging from trees, cars parked allover yards, and too many u related people living in one house. I Planner Nielsen said that according to the new Ordinance parki~g will be limited to specific places. Cars on property must be licensed and operable. Junk cannot be stored outside. This should help alleviate som of the problems. I Alan Seigman - 5775 Echo Road really hates to see junk cars alt. over yards, no grass left, and really would like to see things change and he Ordinance enforced. Nancy Clawson - 5720 Echo Road said there is a very large famitY living in the rental house and it is not a business, it is a hobby, and thesr things are hard to control. Tom Buckley - 5760 Echo Road wanted to know what "teeth" the n1w ordinance will have, and whether the renter or the owner is responsible.t Planner Nielsen said the City will continue to work on a "comp+aints received" basis. There will be a penalty equal to a misdemeaner ($500)ind each day will constitute a separate offense. Both the renter and landlord II be informed, but the owner will be responsible. I Jim Jenson - 5795 Echo Road "When. cars are left up on blocks, tren't you dealing with a safety factor? Is this allowed?" Planner Nielsen - "No, it is not allowed, if you see a specifif instance please inform us and we will do something about it." I CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JOINT MEETING OF MONDAY, APRIL 29, 1985 page five . Counc:i:1member Haugen would like to see strict rules on rental roperty. Planner Nielsen said that the owners will be responsible. A 1 tter will be sent to the owner, giving him 10 days to take care of the prob em. The next step will be turning it over to the City Attorney. He will ta e it down to the court and file a complaint and the next step will be court Win Kohls - 5680 Echo Road wanted to know what will be done apout very large boats sitting in front yards. I Planner Nielsen said they will be required to meet the same selbacks as a structure, if there is still room to store a boat in the fron~ yard, there isn't anything we can do. In a "primarily boating community" tt would create too many problems to require back yard storage. A resident of Echo Road (who did not identify himself) "I think what most people on Echo Road, and in this community, want is what is reasonab1f' what common sense dictates. We're looking for an Ordinance that has some rite." . Jack Barnum - 5740 Echo Road complained about high uncut grassr Planner Nielsen said the new Ordinance does not deal with grasF' but perhaps the Noxious Weed Ordinance should be updated to deal with the problem. Planner Nielsen - 120 days. If they haven't called for an that time, we will revoke their permit. I hOWl long do they have inspection within I When someone takes out a Building Permit to build a house, to get the work done? A water drainage problem on Echo Road was mentioned by two res'dents that had flooded basements this year due to blockage of Badger Park dra'nage ditch. Public Works crew cleared the blockage on the north side of Co nty Road 19. The residents requested that the ditch running through Badger ark be dragged to clean it out. Terry Klomps - 23950 Clover Lane wanted to know if the change would affect his back setback. I from R-2 to R1-C Planner Nielsen said it will change from 50 feet to 40 feet. How many parking spaces will a person be allowed to have? . Planner Nielsen - It will depend on the length of the driveway'. No parking will be allowed in the front yard. One car can be parked on a paved surface beside the driveway, and parking is allowed in the driveway. . . . CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JOINT MEETING OF MONDAY, APRIL 29, 1985 page six Michael Pierro - 5880 Christmas Lake Road wants to know why II .23.h. was extended from 3 to 6 months. Due to the fact that some businesses are seasonal. Michael Pierro also expressed concern over dock use and submit for change of II Subd. 7 (Exhibit B - attached). His main con private property as public access. He also mentioned parking to use for public access. ed suggestions ern was using roblems due Mayor Rascop - Tonka Bay has passed an Ordinance that a reside t can have 2 boats, they are allowed up to 4, but must sign an affidavit sa ing that the resident owns all 4 boats. LMCD is also holding a public hearOng on a new ordinance. Registrations are difficult to check because if th boat is in the water but not moving it doesn't have to be registered. It would be hard to enforce such an ordinance using ownership, as boats can als be registered internationally or with the Coast Guard, and these would not s ow up on the state registrations. I Warren Peterson - 23660 Gillette Curve complained about a rentjl in the area and wanted to know if a maintenance code could be set up for r ntals. Planner Nielsen said he doesn't know if it is legal to differe tiate between owned and rental properties. He will look into maintenance ru~ings, possibly to cover all residential property. I II. Administrative Section ~ This contains procedural requirements for conditional use permit , variances, amendments and appeals. It shifts some of the informational req irements from City Staff to the applicants (i.e. mailing list of all property :wners within 500 feet of the involved property). It complies with state stat tes. Council discussion - The Council questioned Planner Nielsen on v rious items and suggested some changes which will be reviewed. I Public Hearin date for the Draft Zonin Ordinance was set for 21 May 1985. I I I that Horace Murfin is intejested in selling Council asked her to tall to Mr. Murfin , LAND BEHIND PUBLIC WORKS GARAGE Councilmember Haugen informed Council the property north of the City Garage. about it and report back to them. MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF FEDERAL SURPLUS PROPERTY Mayor Rascop suggested to Council that the pay $30 yearly membership to the abovementioned organization, and subscribe to their catalog, as it looks as if they may have some excellent sale prices on many varied items (b9th office and maintenance). I I . . . CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JOINT MEETING OF MONDAY, APRIL 29, 1985 page seven unanimously. Gagne moved, Haugen seconded to 1) pay the $30 membership fee; 2) subscribe to the catalog; and 3) designate Mayor Rascop and Administrator ogt as buyers. Motion carried unanimously. TRIVESCO MEETING - MONDAY, MAY 6, 1985 - 7:30 PM Administrator Vogt requested that the Council meet Monday evening to go over the Trivesco agreements so they can be accepted at the May 13th ity Council meeting. Council agreed to do so. ADJOURNMENT Gagne moved, Stover seconded, to adjourn at 10:35 PM. Motion RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED Susan Niccum Deputy Clerk I cajried . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, MAY 7, 1985 _.-.~..._~/ COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5,155 CO NTRY CLUB ROAD 7:30PM M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER Chair Leslie called the meeting to order at 7:40. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Leslie, Commissioners Reese, Boyd, Benson, Schul (7:55); Council Liaison Stover; Planner Nielsen and Roberta Dybvik. Absent: Commissioner Spellman (excused) REQUEST FOR SETBACK VARIANCE - MICHAEL HALLEY - 24000 STRATFORD PL CE Mr. Greg Frazee, architect, was present to request a 10 foot varia zoned R-2, Single Family Residential, requires a 35 foot front yar is requesting a 25 foot setback. The lot drops off from west to e of 20%. He cited this as justification for a variance. He also f home was built with a 35 foot setback it would not be complimentar borhood. It would then appear significantly lower than other neig z and WatteTI cting Secretary ceo The property, setback, he st at a slope lt that if the to the neigh- borhood homes. Mr. Frazee did present a new set of drawings, showing the garage 0 the side but still requiring a 10 foot setback. Ms. Colleen Brown, a potential buyer for Lot 13, objected to the v riance. Commission discussed the variance and felt that the site could be sed without a variance, they did not feel that there was a hardship involved. Commissioner Watten asked Mr. Frazee how the home would be affecte by moving it back 10 feet. Mr. Frazee again replied that his concern is what is complimentary to the neigh- borhood. Commissioner Schultz feels that the neighbors rely on enforcement 1f the setbacks. Schultz moved, seconded by Boyd, to recommend to Co~ncil to deny t e variance. Motion passed by Roll Call vote - 6 ayes - Watten, Reese, Leslie, oyd, Benson and Schultz. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, MAY 7, 1985 page two . REQUEST FOR SIMPLE SUBDIVISION AND LOT WIDTH VARIANCE SUSAN BONTHIUS (HANDY ESTATE) - 27190 EDGEWOOD ROAD . . I Ms. Susan Bonthius, representing the R. C. Handy Estate, requested approval of dividing the property into two buildable lots. The property is cu rently divided into two lots. These two lots would have to be combined and rediv"ded. Due to a small lagoon on the property's east side, a lot width variance 0 33 feet is requested (120 feet is required - 87 feet is proposed). Commissioner Schultz asked what the situation would be on the exist ling smaller parcel if the variance were refused. Planner Nielsen said the small lot would be unbuildable. Reese moved, Bruce seconded, to recommend to Council to approve thel variance con~ tingent:upon the Planner's recommendations: 1. The request should be submitted to and approved by the Minnehaha Creek Water- shed District; and 2. The applicant should provide drainage and utility easements if feet in width along each side of the east and west lot lines and along the shoreline of each lot. I I I I " I Mr. P~erce tade the present- still haVinj 18 units, Motion carried unanimously. SITE PLAN REVIEW - ROBERT PIERCE - 5540 COUNTY ROAD 19 Mr. Robert Pierce and Mr. Nicholas Ruehl were present~ ation, explaining that financing is more~manageable by but having four smaller four-plexc)'pu!ilt in'phflsesc", Mr. Ruehl reviewed the Planner's Report and agreed with it. adjust the site plan to comply with the 22 foot requirement He said they fully understand the paving requirements. Planning Commission Discussion. I He sai~ they will betweenl buildings. I I WOUld Garages. Commission asked about garages and were told they in later phasing. Water. either depend be installed Chair Leslie asked about water and was told 2 possibili ies exist, a private well or connecting to Tonka Bay water system. D cision will upon the cost. Commissioner Benson is concerned about the lack of garages. Commissioner BoyeVasked aboULthedevelbpmerrt timing and was told it depends on the market, possibly'as early as this fall. Chair Leslie requested the square footage per unit and was told 8 5 square feet. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, MAY 7, 1985 page three . Commissioner Watten likes the mass broken up but question~the quality. Pierce said they will not be cheap units. The Commission asked who will manage rental units? PiercE Construction will have onsite management. Rent. 2 bedroom without garage............... $450 2 bedroom with garage .................. 600/650 Exterior material. wood siding. Schultz moved, seconded by Boyd, to recommend to Council to approve site plan contingent upon the Planner's recommendations: . 1. The site plan should be adjusted to comply with zonin1 requirements for the future buildings. Future approvals will requ re approval as a planned unit development (P.U.D.). 2. The City Engineer should verify the acceptability of 1rading, drainage and utility plans. Since the proposed sewer is a latE ral line, the installation will be inspected by the City Engineer. The applicant will be responsible for these costs. 3. The developer should be required to submit constructifn bids for the site improvements. A performance bond or letter of cfedit should then be required to assure completion of the improvements. I 4. The City Attorney should review the app. licant's eVide.;'ce of financial capability to complete the building, driveway and par ing area. 5. The parking and driveway areas should be paved and pr perly striped. Motion carried by Roll Call vote - 5-1 -Benson/nay/opposed to absentee owner- ship. SITE PLAN REVIEW - AMERICAN LEGION POST #259 - 24450 SMITHT WN ROAD Postponed. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR none. REPORTS Council Liaison Stover gave the Council Report. ADJOURNMENT Leslie moved, Reese seconded, to adjourn at 9:25 PM. . RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED Notes taken by Roberta Dybvik Minutes written from notes by S~e Niccum . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, MAY 21, 1985 COfNCIL CHAMBERS 57 5 COUNTRY CLUB 7: 0 PM ROAD M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER Chair Leslie called the meeting to order at 7:38 PM. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Leslie, Commissioners Reese, Spellman, Watten an~ Schultz; Nielsen; Council Liaison Stover and Deputy Clerk Nicc~m. I i I , i I Planner Absent: Commissioners Boyd and Benson (both excused) MINUTES ht the Planning The minutes of March 19, April 16, and May 7, 1985 are requested Commission. i I I Planner Nielsen reviewed the proposed Zoning Ordinance (see minuter' of Joint Council/ Planning Commission meeting - April 29, 1985). He also reviewed t e requests presented at the April 29th meeting (see Planner's Report - May 21, 1985). I 7:30 PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE REVISION Audience Response , Larry Samuelson of Minneapolis again requested extension of R-1D! zoning to include the William G. White property at 5865 Glencoe Road. Eileen Hassell - Edina Realty asked if 50' or 75' setback would pe in effect, as she is concerned about the Ridinger property at 5330 Howards Point Road. Chair Leslie said it depends on what the Commission recommends tonight, and the final City Council decision. , i i William F. Kelley - 25000 Yellowstone Trail asked questions abouf' 200.06, P.U.D., wondering why the Ordinance copy states "Reserved". I I I I Planner Nielsen said that the P.U.D. is not yet finished. [8:17 PM - Public Portion of the hearing closed.] Commission discussion Commissioner Reese asked about the White property (5865 Glencoe oad) history. Planner Nielsen said i was originally platted into small "Excel ior" lots, but the owner combined the lots at a later date. Planner Nielsen said he recommended extending the R-1D District Road. rst to Glencoe PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, MAY 21, 1985 page two . PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE REVISION - continued Commission Discussion Motion #1 Shady Island.. The medium lot square feet in I Nielsen said there are approximately 30 lpts on 27,972 square fee to . 20 out of 30 lots arr less I Planner size is size. Shady Island. than 30,000 Fire Lane Public Hearing will be held June 4; 1985. Schultz moved, Watten seconded, that pursuant to Minnesota statute$ Section 462.355 Subd. 4 the Shorewood Planning Commission recomm, ends that the CitytcounCil adopt the new Zoning Ordinance dated April 1985 on an interim basis for period of six months, in which time the following issues shall be resolved: following numbers tally with the numbers listed on Planner'seport - May 21,1985) (The #3 #4 . #5 #6 #7 Shady Island. A>petition was/received to Zone Shady Island R-1B rather than R-1C. Planned Unit Development by C.U.P. The new Ordinance shoul( contain a prov~s~on allowing cluster housing by conditional use permit. The pr(visions would be the same as the current P.U.D. provisions but would not equire rezoning. Fire Lanes. a separate public hearing to discuss provision~ pertaining to the use of fire lanes is scheduled"for the 4 June Planning (ommission meet- ing. Presumably, these provisions will be incorporated intc the new Ordinance. Boat Docks. A letter dated 22 April (sent out earlier) reqtests changes to boat docking provisions. Expansion of Nonconforming Structures. Three requests scheculed for the 4 June meeting suggest that possibly some of these requests should be handled on an administrative basis rather than by variance or conditional use permit. #8 C-4 District. Two neighbors of the Minnetonka Portable Drecging Company object to allowing boat and marine sales in the C-4 District, fearing that boat traffic on Gideon's Bay would ultimately increase. i Storage of Recreational Vehicles. Sample ordinances attach~d have been pro~ vided relative to the storage or parking of recreational ve icles on residen~ tial lots (see Exhibit B - Planners Report - 21 May 1985). I I #9 #10 Also making an addition of: Items #1 and #2 #1 I I , I I I White/Samuelson. A letter dated 24 April 1985 (sent out ea~lier to the Plan- ning Commission) requests that the R-1D district be extende to include prop- erty located in the northeast quadrant of Glencoe Road and cademy Avenue. Lakeshore Setback Decision. 50' vs. 75'. . . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, MAY 21, 1985 page three PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE REVISION - continued Motion #1 continued #2 Robins. A letter dated 10 May 1985 (also sent earlier) reqr, ests similar extension of the R-1D district to include the southeast qua rant of Glencoe Road and Academy Avenue. ~fl Items #1 and #2. That the R-1D district be expanded to include the northeast quadrant ofGlencoeRoad and Academy Avenue and the southeast quadrant of Glencoe Road and Academy Avenue, making Glencoe Road the western boundary f' f the R-1D District; Item #8 - that a moratorium be placed on "enclosed marine and boat sales" until the Ordinance has been officially adopted. Motion carried by Roll Call vote - 5-0 - Leslie, Reese, Watten, spL, llman and \ Schultz. r Motion #2 Reese moved, Schultz seconded, to keep the public hearing record 0 en until May 28, 1985, to allow additional written comments on the new Zoni g Ordinance. Motion carried unanimously. The above motion was suggested by William Kelley. The Planning Commission requested that the City Attorney clarify wether the list of eight items to be studied in the six month period could be expa dedor if further discussion is limited to the eight items. 9:05 PUBLIC HEARING - OUR SAVIOUR'S LUTHERAN CHURCH - 23290 STATE HIGHWAY 7 REZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Reverend Steurnagel made the presentation. Our Saviour's Lutheran to add a two story classroom addition with an unfinished basement. addition will be 6,700 square feet with the gross floor area appro square feet. Church wishes The proposed imately 20,857 I I ~everend S~eurnagel ques~ioned Planner's recommendation#: (Signagf ~nto compl~ance). He sa~d they have three separate funct~ons: I I to be brought 1. church services 2. day care 3. day school I I i I I lal' date, to pre- Commission suggested treating signage as a separate issue at a vent holding up present request. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, MAY 2$, .1985 page four OUR SAVIOUR'S LUTHERAN CHURCH - continued Pam Honzl of 6065 Glencoe Road appeared, to state that there is a 1egal boundary dispute going on between themselves and the church, with two separ te surveys varying up to approximately 20 feet. Planner Nielsen said this would not ffect the present request, as the setback is sufficient either way. i Commissioner Reese asked about drainage. Planner Nielsen said the iCity Engineer recommends 12" pipe under the parking lot. They plan to drain int~ the ditch along Highway 7 and will need MNDOT approval for this. Planner Nielsen 4lso mentioned, for informational purposes, that the Excelsior water line has beenjextended to cover the church which will allow them to sprinkle the building. I Spellman moved, Watten seconded, to recommend to Council to approv and conditional use permit for Our Saviour's Lutheran Church conti five (5) Planner's recommendations and the five (5) Engineer's rec Planner's recommendations the rezoning gent upon the mmendations. 1. The parking area should be redesigned and enlarged to comply with space and setback requirements of the Shorewood Zoning Ordinance. Signage should be brought into compliance with Shorewood Zontng Ordinance. Grading, drainage and utilities should be subject to the revt'ew and comments of the City Engineer. 1 Construction of the westerly driveway requires approval and ' permit from MNDOT. 2. 3. 4. 5. This approval does not include the future expansion shown on the site plan. Future expansion will be subject to the conditional use perm t process. Engineer's recommendations 1. Grading. There is only minimal grading required for the b The land in back of the proposed building addition goes up a rate. The proposed elevations at the back of the proposed a the mid-point split and slope east and west along the north The rest of the property slopes to S.T.H. 7. Therefore, the not pocket anywhere and should eventually get to the ditch 0 of S.T.H. 7. 2. Drainage. According to the Comprehensive Storm Sewer Plan storm sewers should be a little larger as there are roughly the building that drain to the proposed storm sewer. The mi should be 12". Also, there should be a depression for the t on the east side of the parking lot to accept the drainage f lot. ilding addition. quite a steep dition at about ide of the building. drainage should the north side the proposed acres behind imum pipe size o catch basins om the parking They will need to get a permit from Mn/DOT to outlet the prof' osed storm sewer in the north ditch of S.T.H. 7. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, MAY 21,1985 page five . 3. Sanitary Sewer. The sanitary sewer is located on the nort~ side of S.T.H. 7 as shown exce~t the manhole 10cati6n~.shown in front of the p~oposed addition appears to be wrong. Manhole 15-11 should be 344.1' west oflManhole 15-10. The invert elevations shown is OK. I 4. Watermain. be OK. The watermain extension from Park Street as shorn appears to 5. Right Turn Lane. The right turn lane shown east of the ea~terly driveway is too short. It should be approximately 300' long with a 1~:1 taper. Also, there should be no right turn sign for the westerly driveway' if there isn't any right turn lane constructed there. Motion carried unanimously. 9:00 PUBLIC HEARING- G & R CONSTRUCTION - 5580 COUNTY ROAD 19 REZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Mr. Gary Lindgren appeared before the Council to request rezoning use permit to convert an existing dwelling into an office building the zoning from R-4, Multiple Family Residential District, to R-C, Commercial District. nd a conditional and to change Residential . Mr. Lindgren discussed #4 in the Planner's Report. innould create a drainage problem. prUing Commission explained that curbing was required for two reasons; 1. drainage control, and 2. to define the parking area and protect landscaping. They iscussed splits in the curbing to provide drainage. Planner Nielsen said the City Engineer will review the drainage plan. He felt that curbing Public portion of the hearing was closed at 9:35 PM. Reese moved, Schultz seconded, to recommend to Council that the ap rove the rezoning and conditional use permit for G & R Construction contingent upon he Planner's six (6) recommendations: 1. Any future expansion of the office building must comply withShorewood's setback requirements (including the 40 foot rear yard). 2. Hours of operation are limited to between 8:00 a.m. and 9:001 p.m. 3. The driveway and parking area should be redesigned to maintain widths of 25 feet and 65-70 feet respectively. The access driverequi es approval by the Hennepin County Department of Transportation. 4. The City should consider requiring perimeter curbing around he parking area and driveway. 5. Site drainage should be subject to review and approval by City Engineer. 6. Existing and proposed landscaping shall be maintained. ~ Motion carried unanimously. . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, JUNE 4, 1985 ! COUN IL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:30 PM M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Leslie called the meeting to order at 7:38 PM. ROLL CALL Present: Chairperson Leslie, Commissioners Spellman, Boyd, Schu tz, Reese and Benson: Planner Nielsen; Council Liaison Stover and eputy Clerk Niccum Absent: Commissioner Watten (excused) APPROVAL OF MINUTES , Reese moved, Boyd seconded, to approve the minutes of ~ as wri~ten. Motion carried unanimously. I moved, seconded by Reese, to approve the minutes of ~ as written, after the date on the minutes to May 21 instead of May 23. Mot~on carried unani- i I Spe llman changing mously. Chairperson Leslie asked that it be recorded in the minutes that t e minutes of March 19, 1985 and the minutes of April 16, 1985 be done and given to th Commission. 7:30 PUBLIC HEARING - GIDEON'S ORCHARD P.U.D. - CONCEPT STAGE WELLESLY HOMES, INC. - 5620 COUNTY ROAD 19 Ms. Kristin Spencer-Barney, President of Wellesly Homes, appeared 0 propose a planned unit development consisting of a three-story, 39-unit condominium roject. The City of Shorewood granted concept stage approval in 1983 to Shorewood C ,ndominiums for this project, their deadline expired, and now we.lleSlY Homes has reSUbmi'tted plans to con- tinue the project under the name of Gideon's Orchard. Ms. Spencer Barney also said that in addition to the information given to the Commission, she h d preliminary plats for the commercial property with her for examination. I I Public portion of the meeting was closed at 7:42 PM. Leslie asked if it ever got to the development stage. Planner Nielsen replied no. I I Leslie asked if there was any Engineer's Report. ! Planner Nielsen said this will take place during the development siage. Jim Parker of Advance Survey and Land Planning was also present. ~e said a study has been done of the drainage area extending to Glen Road/County Road ~9, about a 25 acre area. The proposal is to build a rentention area by building a be~m and a controlled outlet structure that would retain water and let it out slowly thr1ugh a 12" pipe. This would control the rate of flow and help the water problem, thts would include water from other areas. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JUNE 4, 1985 page two .In areas where there are parking lots and building, all the drainage would be channeled down the driveway into the basement garage of the would be collected by a catch basin that would have a grit chamber a oil, etc. that comes off a parking lot. A pipe would then channel t out to the retention area. from those areas building where it d a.skimmer for e clean water Planner Nielsen pointed out that the cornEr where the commErcial bUillding will be located will remain C-3. This area is a little over a quarter of an acre. . The driveway will be moved to a different area to create safer .cces~ to County Road 19. i Tom Barney, Director of Wellsley Homes, said the garage will come will be deeper to allow access from existing building. dorn, I i possiblel. , the addition Wellsley Homes, Inc. wishes to begin the project as soon as Reese moved, Boyd seconded, to recommend to Council to approve the 90ncept Stage, contingent upon the Planner's recommendations: 1. I Pond area. The ultimate size and design of the ponding are"l should be in detail in the development stage of the P.U.D. process. l addressed . 2. Moving the building northward. so. , Site drainage my be better 1acilitated by doing I . 3. Financial capability. Applicant must submit evidence of fi~ancial capability to complete the project prior to the issuance of a building p1rmit. I A letter of credit for site improvement 4ust be provided. Motion carried by roll call vote - 5 ayes - Spellman, Leslie, Reese,1 Boyd and Schultz. 4. Letter of credit. SIMPLE SUBDIVISION LARRY SAMUELSON FOR WILLIAM WHITE - 5865 GLENCOE ROAD postponed VARIANCE REQUEST - EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE ROGER ZAHN - 5815 RIDGE ROAD Mr. Zahn was present to request a 15' variance to put on a 13' x 22~ two-story room addition and a 7~' x 10' deck to the rear of the existing house. T~e existing house is 35' from Ridge Road. The addition will be on the opposite side qf the house, away from Ridge Road and will not increase the nonconformity. He said t~e addition will measure 500 square feet for both floors. i , Boyd moved, Schultz seconded, to recommend to Council to grant the tariance request. Motion carried unanimously. I . . . . ! I i I I I I Mr. Koester was present to request a setback variance to locate a g~rage 10' from the rear lot line rather than 50' as required by Ordinance. He is chaning his size request from 24' x 28' to 24' x 26'. He presented signatures of four neigh ors whose property is closest to his, stating they did not object to his request. PLANNING COMMISSION MUNUTES TUESDAY, JUNE 4, 1985 page three SETBACK VARIANCE MR. KENNETH KOESTER - 24825 AMLEE ROAD He also said he has a small existing tuck-under garage that he woul like to make into a part of the family room. Mr. Bob Gagne of 24850 Amlee Road pointed out to the Commission tha is located in the back of his property and if the garage were too c a well rig could not get in to service the well. There is a steep side of the house. Mr. Koester's well to the house, on the other Commission discussed the issue and felt that even with the garage could be closer to the house, also that one could be removed if necessary. I fro1 the house. leaving roomjfor the well rig, of the obstr ctious:.:bS a tree that I Commission asked Planner Nielsen how far the proposed garage is He said he thought it was between 22' and 28'. ! Schultz moved, Spellman seconded, to recommend to Council to deny t~e application for a setback variance, the reason being that they do not feel this con titutes a hardship. They suggested to Mr. Koester that he move the ga.rag. e forward, farth r north, to minimize the distance of the variance. Motion carried by roll call vote -5- . - Spellman, Leslie, Reese, Boyd and Schultz. I I Mr. Boote appeared before the Commission to request a variance to e~pand a nonconform- ing structure, the existing house is only 30 feet from the front prqperty line rather than 50' required by Ordinance. He proposes to build a 15' x 22' S1ngle_story room addition on the west side of the house. The addition would be loca ed 20'-1" from the front of the house - 50'-1" from the street r.o.w. A 14' x 14' dec would be built to the rear of the room addition. Reese moved, seconded by Boyd, to recommend to Council to approve t~e variance request for expansion of a nonconforming structure. Motion carried unanimo4sly. VARIANCE REQUEST - EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE MARVIN BOOTE - 24340 YELLOWSTONE TRAIL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JUNE 4, 1985 page four . VARIANCE REQUEST - EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE SCOTT TOMPKINS - 20940 IVY LANE . . Mr. Tompkins appeared before the Commission to request a variance t~ expand a nonconform- ing structure. His lot is long and narrow so, although he has ampl~ setbacks in the front and rear, the yard requirements do not comply.on either side. .He WjShes to replace the flat portions of his roof with a peaked roof system, which cons itutes a structural alteration. He also wishes to add a deck at the rear of his proper y (the deck would conform). . Schultz moved, Reese seconded, to recommend to Council that they ap rove the variance for expansion of a nonconforming structure. Motion carried unanimo sly. QUESTION OF GRANTING PLANNER AUTHORITY TO APPROVE PERMITS ON NONCON ORMING STRUCTURES Commissioner Schultz asked what the procedure would be to grant Bra some authority to approve permits on nonconforming structures. Planner Nielsen replied that there are two possible alternatives, 0 e is to simply allow the building official to do it, given the parameters we have een using; the other is to simply have it go straight to Council without holding a y public hearings. He suggested reserving any decision at this time. He said he has r ceived a letter from a local attorney who is.Con~~);'ned',about the relaxed approach toward nonconforming struct- ures. Brad would like the Commission to read ~he letter. It was I sted as one of the things for study during the interim ordinance and if the decision i made to do so, it can be part of it. 8:30 PUBLIC HEARING - FIRE LANES This Public Hearing concerns the ordinance pertaining to the future use of fire lanes. Planner Nielsen: passed out copies to the Planning Commission of the 1st Draft of the Ordinance. gave a copy to Mr. Mark Gerling of 25660 Birch Bluff Road to rea~ upon request. stated that the proposed Ordinance will be included in the Zonin . Ordinance and also be numbered (as shown in Draft) and marked on the Zoning Map. . ile access, however, obile access at this g them to change referred to 6-Crescent Beach, saying that Class II allows snowmo part of' Crescent Beach is owned by Tonka Bay who prohibits sno time. Administrator Vogt will write a letter to Tonka Bay, aski their policy and allow the access. hours of use will be 6:00 a.m. - 10:30 p.m., regulated by Park 0 dinance #91. Chairperson Leslie said the Planning Commission did agree to give 7tTimber Lane further consideration. i Commissioner Schultz asked why parking was allowed at 6-Crescent Be~ch. Planner Nielsen explained that there is already a parking area in efistence at 6-Cres- cnet Beach. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JUNE 4, 1985 page five I Commissioner Spellman said he j:hought swimming and fishing should bel removed from the Classifications because it would invbdve toilets and garbage cleanup at these locations, he felt that problems could evolve. Conrad Wurm of 6185 Cardinal Drive said he hates to see than it is. the lake r1stricted any more I Mark Gerling asked what the rationale was for the different Classif"cations. Planner Nielsen and Chairperson Leslie said many factors were invol ed. To begin with the Planning Commission has spent a great deal of time studying fir lanes. Some other reasons listed were: - historical use - traffic patterns - how much of a detriment it would be - site characteristics ! - residential area i - whether it would be a4vantageous - location I parking availibility I all sites were visited by the Commission I I Chairperson Leslie mentioned tha.t 6-Crescent Beach had been Chosen1s the snowmobile access point because of the four in the area (3-Grant-Lorenz, 4-Th rd Street, and 5-Eureka) it seemed the most feasible. Gale Olson. Jr. of 25775 Birch BIU. ff Road said that people won't drite their snowmobiles on pavement because it wrecks .the tracks, and that this might cause more of a problem because they might then go back to using the other fire lanes and c use more of a contraversy. He also felt it would create a safety factor. I Gale Olson, Sr. - 25775 Birch Bluff Road said he has seen snowmobi es tear down Birch Bluff road at excessively high speeds, and he feels the further the have to go on the road, the more accidents are at risk. William Dickson of 26245 Birch Bluff Road said that 4~Third Street s basically used as a driveway. He also said that historically it has been used as snowmobile aCCess and he would like to see it continue that way. He also asked about maintenance, as the City of Shorewood would be re~ponsible, and what it involved. Commission said mostly brush removal, along with any specific probfems. Mr. Gerling asked how often they would be cleaned. i Chairperson Leslie said they were just starting to study the draft ~,nd it hadn't been discussed yet, but it would depend on the use of the lanes. I i There was some concern s how.n over excess use of the fire la. nes. andt.a rking problems. It was mentioned that at the present time only the neighbors use th fires lanes, and as they are the only ones that know about them, if they don't "spre, d the word" they will probably remain primarily under neighborhood use. It is also difficult to locate them if you are not familiar with them to begin with. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JUNE 4, 1985 page six .ommissioner Schultz asked about liability. Planner Nielsen said they would come under the same conditions as th~ parks, that negligence would have to be proved. He also said there are rules inlthe Park Ordinance #91 that refer to various things in the Ordinance (Any person swimmi1g when a lifeguard is not on duty swims at their own risk. Children under ten must be ~ccompanied by an adult.) : Reese moved, Spellman seconded, to continue the public hearing until!the study session meeting of June 18, 1985 to give the Commission time to study the dr~ft. Motion carried unanimously. SIMPLE SUBDIVISION PETER HOLMGREN - 5955 CAJED LANE/27055 SMITHTOWN ROAD Mr. Holmgren was to rearrange the Smithtown Road. present to requE'st approval of a simple subdivision land lot combination property lines between thelots located at 5955 CaHd Lane and 27055 He-proposed to straighten the lot line between them~ I Spellman moved, Reese seconded, to recommend to Council to approve t~e simple subdivision subject to the Planner's recommendations: i I 1. The new lot line should be adjusted so that neither parcel is teduced in size 2. Drainage and utility easements should be redrawn based on the ~ew lot line and consistent with the procedure specified by the City Attorney. I ~otion carried - 5 ayes - 1 nay - Schultz - reason: he didn't thinklthe lot variance was significant enough to be an issue. I MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR none REPORTS Council Liaison Stover gave the Council Report. An item concerning the Planning Commission was the Zonin reversed the Planning Commission decision on itens #1 and the R-ID District west to Glencoe Road. They also, based Island residents, voted to zone Shady Island R-IB instead Ordinanc. The Council #2, rega ding extending upon>a p tition :byShady , of R-IC. The Council wanted to be sure.th. at the Planning Commission understfod that they acted upon the advice of the attorney, who advised keeping things as tig t as possible, because they can be loosened up at a later time, but not tightened up. The Attorney also said that any issue, besides the ones listed, ca~ be studied during the next six months, but they must be listed in the legal notice af the time of the hearing. ' ADJOURNMENT . Benson moved, Schultz seconded, to adjourn at 9:30 PM. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED Sue Niccum Deputy Clerk . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, JUNE 18, 1985 COUNCIL HAMBERS 5755 COU TRY CLUB ROAD 7:30 PM M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER Acting Chairman Reese called the meeting to order at 7:40 PM. ROLL CALL Present: Acting Chair Reese, Commissioners Spellman, Boyd, W~tten and Schultz; Planner Nielsen; and Deputy Clerk Niccum I Absent: Commissioners, LesLie (excused) and Benson APPROVAL OF MINUTES Boyd moved, Schultz seconded, to approve the minutes as written. Motion carried unanimously. "FIRE LANES" Planner Nielsen reviewed the first draft of the Ordinance. He done because: id the study was 1. Residents were interested in using the "fire lanes". 2. Residents were concerned about the use of the "fire lanes" He said "fire lanes" are actually platted streets to the lake. He also mentioned that the following items were suggested at the ,first part of the hearing as additions to the Ordinance: 1. Subd. 19 a. 2. indicate that the Ordinance is based upon 1istoric use. a. (3) (a) - limit dock installation to Shorewood Iresidents. Subd. 19 3. Subd. 19 a. (3) (c) - limit docking to daytime use. Planner Nielsen also mentioned that to erosion. This will not be known RESIDENT COMMENTS Timber Lane may not be in ex~stence until the property is surveYjd. I , I any more due Jerry Doboskenski of 4955 St. Albans Bay Road emhphatically lanes" should be kept open and used as fire lanes. st~ted I I I st1ting that the "fire Plannen Nielsen read'aLetter from the Excelsior Fire Chief lanes" in Shbrewood are not needed by the fire department. that the "fire . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JUNE 18, 1985 page two RESIDENT COMMENTS CONTINUED Mark Gerling of 25660 Birch Bluff Road asked the following tw questions: 1. Is the facility necessary and worth it's cost to the tax ayers? 2. Are the rules of the ordinance enforcable so as to preve9t violations which would diminish the property values and jeopardize the pr~vacy of nearby residents? I I He read and presented a letter elaborating on the above (letteJ attached to June 20 memo from Sue Niccum). I I I Wendell Hagen of 5125 Shady Island Road wondered about parkin1 launch canoes, and how it would affect private property owners. the fishing, garbage and parking problems that already exist a bridge. I I Steve Haskins of 5455 Timber Lane s13.id.he atteIldedthe Governol.' s Task Force meetings for eight months. He said their two main concerns relating to this ordinance were: 1. Access to the site. 2. Guaranteed parking. if people want to He also mentioned the Shady Island He said the lanes he visited had no parking provisions. He sa~. d the Governor's Task Force considered Timber Lane property right next to the " ire lane" as an access, and voted it down because of lack of parking and contr I of parking. He referred to an existing problem on Timber Lane, next to thelWebster property (5525 Timber Lane). It is being used publically for launChing~and by fisherpersons, and there is a trash problem. He asked how the ordinance cove s this. Planner Nielsen said that it is part of the platted road so t e ordinance does not relate to it. I Mr. Haskins asked that the Planning Commission look into this rob1em, and address the parking and trash. He said if the City is going to make the "fire lanes" public a cess points by Ordinance, that the City be fully prepared to accept the costs which will not be minor. He was also concerned about signage, enforcing parking and doctage. ! Commissioner Spellman said he would like to mention that at th~ last meeting he had recommended removing swimming and fishing as'l<1ses for the 'I'fire lanes". I I Mary Pilley of 25560 Birch Bluff Road said she was not notifie~. She also was very concerned about property value. She said the former Mayor of lreenwood said that Greenwood had closed their accesses because they felt they wer illegal because they lower property values on adjoining property. She was als. concerned about the dock on Eureka, referring to partying and speeding. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JUNE 18, 1985 page three RESIDENT COMMENTS CONTINUED said he has measured the Tilber no longer exists. He sugge ted I , Lane "firEl proposing David Schmidtt of 5580 Timber Lane lane" and that, due to erosion, it vacation of the "fire lanes". John and Ramona Emmer of 25680 Birch Bluff Road, also speaking for Dick Lury of 26310 Birch Bluff Road (Mr. Lury received no notification, and did not know about the meeting until this afternoon, so was not able to attend), aid that they are strongly opposed to the proposed ordinance, they feel it is de rimental to property values and impossible to police parking, trash, drinking, part ing, etc. They feel it should not be the neighbors responsibilty to watch over the, lanes. Mr. Emmer asked who is responsible for maintaining the steps aId dock, and who is responsible for the liability? He said there is loose lumber nd rusty nails on the walkway. Acting Chairman Reese said one of the purposes of the new Ordi ance is clarification of maintenance responsibility. I Planner Nielsen said the City Attorney said the liability coverage would be the same as it is in the City parks. Mr. Emmer suggested vacating or selling the "fire lanes" to adfacent property owners. Ginny Sexton of 5355 Elmridge Circle agreed with previous commtnts. She is concerned about the dock. She asked how long the dock has been on The E1iIreka "fire lane". I Planner Nielsen said he had been told that they have had permi$sion for 7 years. She also felt Crescent Beach was sufficient, and that the othet'. "fire lanes" should be closed. I I Ramona Emmer asked who put in the dock. Planner Nielsen said the Olson family of 25775 Birch Bluff ROaf. I Lee Webster of 5525 Timber Lane he felt that the Ordinance is just legalizing whats already been done. He said he, as a private citizen, has to gq to the DNR and LMCD for a dock permit and wanted to know why this isn't necessary 1n the Eureka dock. He also said that if the City is going to give access, do it b1t it should be done properly with the proper facilities, and the could involve acq iring a separate piece of land if none of the "fire lanes" are acceptable for t is purpose. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JUNE 18, 1985 page four RESIDENT COMMENTS CONTINUED I Lowell Arnold of 4940 Shady Island Road was extremely upset ab~ut existing con- ditions on the island regarding the Shady Island bridge. He s~id his wife has been sworn at, garbage an4 human excrement is dumped in his yard, af'd its an intolerable situation. He feels the DNR should provide lake access, not the City. taxes used to clean "fire lanes". His recommendation is if does not need the fire lanes, abandon them. All people present, with the exception of two, were lakeshore to this fact, Lowell Arnold wanted to know, if people were so why weren't they present? He does not want his th fire department wners. Referring oncerned about access, Acting Chairman Reese told him that they had been present at the hearing and had already given their testimony. tfe previous part of I I Lee Webster said that by using permits. He accepting it. the issue has to be addressed, that Deep~aven did it right said the City is not addressing the issu1' they are only Lowell Arnold said that the Commission is going on hearsay because nothing is in the minutes. I reg1rding dock permission A question was asked about people that want the dock. Planner Nielsen Said he has a petition with 30 signatures on it in favor of the dock. I , , Margaret Lindberg of 25530 Birch Bluff Road felt with the beac~ one block away it is not necessary to have all the other "fire lanes" on 'irch . lUff Road. Karen Zubert of 5320 Elmridge Circle is concerned about traffi1, parking and children's safety on the roads. Carol Miller of 26020 Birch Bluff Road said she felt that her been affected by having ,a "fire lane" next door. She said it to her by her real estate lady. ~Iroperty value has ~lad been mentioned Don Hanson of 25480 are not, and if the , Birch Bluff Road said lake shore taxes are gbing valuation is affected, something should be rone up, non lake shore about the taxes. Richard Tradewell of 5515 Timber Lane said if the City of Shorw~od is considering making the "fire lanes" lake accesses, a lot more thought shoul~ go into the Ordinance. The City has to be responsible and liable without harming adjac~nt property owners. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JUNE 18, 1985 page five PLANNING COMMISSION MADE THE FOLLOWING LIST OF OPTIONS 1. Upgrade as fire lanes for fire protection 2. Vacate 3. No docks 4. Develop some as recreational facilities 5. Regulate parking/provide trash removal 6. Delete fishing/swimming 7. Different term than "fire lane" 8. Emphasize historic use 9. Dock to be installed by Shorewood residents only 10. Installer to insure the dock 11. Survey "fire lanes" 12. City to provide sanitary facilities/traxh removal 13. Police Enforcement 14. On-street parking permits for Shorewood residents only 15. How many are needed 16. General desirability 17. Need for rules . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, JUNE 18, 1985 page six c The public portion of the hearing was closed at 9:16 PM. COMMISSION COMMENTS AND MOTIONS Vacation Commissioner Spellman said heidfeit,tna:t, swcimfuimJaniil fiishing sh all "fire lanes""because they cause sanitation and trash probl retain swimming and fishing, sanitary facilities will have to site. 1i1id:b~ removedfrorn ms. He said if they e provided at each Commission discussed the possibility of vacating Sahdy Island 'fire lane" but retaining it as an easement. Commissioner Watten said he any public accesses for its i is against vacation as long as Shotewood does not have residents tha.t do not live on the ltke. Commissioner Watten would like the deed checked to see what war said about the "fire lanes" in connection with "Mann's Addition". ! Watten moved, Boyd seconded, to recommend to Council that the "fire lanes" are not vacated in total. Motion carried - 4 ayes - 1 nay (Spellman) Schultz moved, Spellman seconded, to recommend to Council that they do not include upgrading of the "fire lanes" as fire lanes in the ordinance. Motion carried unanimously. Spellman moved, Schultz seconded, to recommend to Council that no docks are to be allowed on any "fire lanes". 2 ayes - 3 nays - motion denied. , Spellman moved, Reese seconded, to recommend to Council that nj docks be allowed on any "fire lanes" except Eureka. 2 ayes - 3 nays - motion d nied. Commissioners decided thaey would like more information before they made a decision on the dock. They discussed developing some as recreational sites. Commission decided the following "fire lanes" should be 1. Timber Lane 2. Grant Lorenz (due to property line dispute) 3. Shady Island 4. Enchanted Island surver History - - - Commissioner Watten said Grant Lorenz was paved.lb.out 10 years ago because he used to launch his boat there. Visit to the"fire lanes" - on July 9th the Commission will v~ ~t the "fire lanes". . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, JUNE 18, 1985 page ::s,even COMMISSION COMMENTS AND MOTIONS CONTINUED The Commission asked Planner Nielsen to get the City Attorney'j opinion on the following: 1. What we have in liability (in writing). 2. If SWimming, is allowed, without supervision does it creati additional liability? 3. If permits are issued for parking on the "fire lanes", c n they be restricted to Shorewood c:eesi'dents only? 4. Inder what conditions and to whom can permits be issued? I Planner Nielsen will also talk to SLMPSD about their willingne~s and ability to patrol the "fire lanes" and the cost to do so. I Watten moved, Spellman seconded, to recommend to cou, ncil that,',anitary facilities and trash removal are to be provided wherever fishing and swi ing are allowed. Motion carried. 3 ayes - 2 nays Reese moved, Watten seconded, to recommend to Council that the Iname "fire lanes" be changed to "lake access lanes". 2 ayes - 3 nays - motion d~nied. Schultz was opposed because of publicity. I Spellman moved, Boyd s, econded, to recommend to Council that th~ p,eople that build the dock are responsible for the insurance coverage, and that dhis coverage must be approved by the City if the dock is allowed. Motion carrie9 unanimously. , Schultz moved, Sellman seconded, to recommend to Council that swimming be permitted only in Class II, Crescent Beach. Motion carried. 3 ayes - 2 nays Commission discu sed on site parking permits and felt that it was an excellent solution. I Schultz moved, W ttten seconded, to recommend to Council that 9hey do not ,address parking permits .n the Ordinance. Motion carried. 4 ayes - 1 ray Commission table discussion on the number of "fire lanes" nee1ed. Schultz moved, B yd seconded, to recommend to Council that acc~ss to the lakes should be provid d in the City of Shorewood for people who do ot live on the lake. Some of t e "fire lanes", not necessarily all, are sufficient access. Motion carried. 4 ayes - 1 nay Commission discu sed the need for rules. Reese moved, Boy Ordinance such a seconded, to r commend to Council that there lis a need for an ! this one. Mot on carried unanimously. . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, JULY 16, 1985 COUNCIl' CHAMBERS 5755 C UNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:30 P M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER Chair Leslie called the meeting to order at 7'40 PM. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Leslie, Commissioner's Benson, Reese, Watten an~ Spellman; Council Liaison Stpver; Planner Nielsen; and Deputyl Clerk Niccum Commissioner Schultz (excused) I , Absent: APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JUNE 18, 1985 Reese moved, Benson seconded, to table approval of the minutes un il the meeting of August 5, 1985. Motion carried unanimously. SIMPLE SUBDIVISION - LOT AREA VARIANCE DARYL TRONES - 26220 WILD ROSE LANE Mr. Trones was present to request a lot line rearrangement. This same rearrangement was approved by Council in April of 1979, but was never recorded, therefore he is bringing it before the Planning Commission as a new request. He aid both lots originally met the 40,000 square foot requirement for the R-IA Di trict but were reduced when Wild Rose Lane came through. He said 2 lots with 2 *.I.D. numbers exist, and what he will be doing is trading square footage from 0 e lot to the other. The reason being because it would make the Carrother's orne become conforming as far as the 10' setback goes. (Another nonconfromit does exist) Mr. Carrothers said he knew it was approved in 1979, and until he decided to sell the lot, did not realize it had not been recorded. He said the C'ty said they would do the recording and did not do so, as a result he has trea ed the land as his own since that time and done Some improv~ments~ Edith Jenks of 26175 Wild Rose Lane objected to the fact that the:lots are under 40,000 square feet. She said she has three acres and if he can h ve smaller lots she can divide her lots up that way too. She objected to the pos ibility of a small single story home being built, saying it would not fit in with the neighbor- hood. She asked Mr. Trones the value of the house. He said it w uld not be a small house and he felt he had to talk to his client about her question about the price. If his client agrees, she can talk to him privately. Planner Nielsen said he had never been aware that the City did the filing of plats for anyone. Bob Reutiman told Mrs. Jenks that the area did not have all 4o,000lsquare anG you didn't have to go far to find small lots and small setbackr. . ! foot lots, . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 16, 1985 page two Benson moved, Reese seconded, to recomment to Council to approve contingent upon the Planner's recommendations that the 5000 foot combined with lot 2, and that the applicant submit new legal desc lots. Motion carried, 4 ayes, 1 nay (Watten). PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND REZONING FROM R-3B to C-4 he lot area variance" riangle be legally iptions of the two Charles Crepeau of "Crepeau Docks" and Tom Lingo of "The Garden P tch" were present. Mr. Crepeau said that in 1982 he worked with the City to establis district. It was up to the applicant to pursue the necessary rez use permits to become a C-4 district. Due to ill health and fina the time he did not do so. a new C-4 zoning ning and conditional cial problems at He said he needs a new warehouse to protect his merchandise from ~heft and the weather, and to give him a work area. Right now he has 3 large canopies a~d wishes to replace them with a 30' x 60' addition. He and Gary Minion of Shorewood Nursery wish to extend a dirt ber into the parking lot facing County Road 19. This would be planted with some permanent plants and also leave an area where the plants can be changed seasonally for disp ay purposes for Shore~ (I wood Nursery. He proposes a screening of plantings running south from the berm to the drainage ditch, then east across the back of "Crepeau Docks" and 'The Garden Patch". He said besides providing screening, it will provide shade and cu down wind, helping to lower heating cost in the winter. He discussed the property at length, saying the only really stablr ground lies under his buildings, which are constructed on floating slabs. An old r ad bed ran under this area. I He wishes to move his dock model located on the west side of the front of "Crepeau Docks" to the east side. He expressed concern over Planner Nielsen's reruest for planted screening saying they will present a problem with the power lines in that location. He discussed parking, saying that on the days he is busy, "The Ga den Patch" is slow, and when they have their busiest days, his business is slow. . Mr. Tom Lingo, who leases "The Garden Patch" , said he wishes to of "The Garden Patch" and he also wants to build a greenhouse dow He presently has a 10' awning and a temporary 15' awning across t to provide cover for his customers and plants. The greenhouse wo for the 15' temporary awning. He wishes to retain the 10' awning east of "The Garden Patch" will be moved and used for screening p The access to the back area will be shared. I I dd on to the rear the east side. e front of his store ld alleviate the need The fence to the rposes. I There are some problems with the driveway. Planner Nielsen is wotking on it. He wants to meet with Hennepin County and the Minnesota Department of Transportation. Planner Nielsen said if the driveway is not paved and striped, Mrj Crepeau will have ! to apply for a variance. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 16, 1985 page three . Planner Nielsen is not prepared to make a recommendation at this time. Bob Reutiman said he didn't see any reason why the whole area couldn't be commercial, it wouldn't bother anyone and there is already commercial right n xt door. Spellman moved, Watten seconded, "The Garden Patch" for 30 days. Reese moved, rezoning and unanimously. Benson seconded, to the conditional use to recommend to Council to exten Motion carried unanimously. recommend to Council to table th~ permit for not more than 30 daysl' I i their permit to keep Public Hearing on Motion carried SIMPLE SUBDIVISION 4865 SUBURBAN DRIVE - JOHN PETRON . Mr. and Mrs. Petron, and Mrs. Petron's mother, Eileen Saleme wer~ present. Mr. Petron, sp. eaking in behalf of Eileen Saleme, a.Sked for a simple ubdivision. She would like to divide off about one acre on the east side. Commissioner Reese, referring to Planner Niel'men' s Report that t ,e lot they were proposing to divide off did not meet the 100' width setback requ~rement, asked if there was any problem with moving the line to comply with the z01ing standards. Mr. Petron said there is sewer in Orchard Lane right next to theohouse. Planner Nielsen said that earlier they had mentioned tapping int the other line and if they consider this. the approval of the City Engineer will' be needed. Reese moved, Watten seconded, to recommend to Council to approve the simple subdiv'- ision contingent upon the five recommendations of the Planner. , I Lot 1 should comply with the 100' lot width requirement Of~the R-1C Sanitary sewer service for Lot 1 shall be subject to the r view and of the City Engineer. 3. The City should keep the alternate resubdivision sketch shqwn on Exhibit D as a guide for the future development of Lot 2. I 4. Future platting of Lot 2 should include the entire site. ~,ndividual lots should not be split off one at a time. I 5. The applicant must pay one park dedication fee of $500 for [the new lot. Motion carried unanimously. SIMPLE SUBDIVISION - LOT WIDTH AND AREA VARIANCE I 5685 GLENCOE ROAD - LARRY SAMUELSON 1. district. 2. approval Mr. Samuelson was present. This property was considered at the ~oning Ordinance Hear- ing. The Planning Commission recommended to Council to change t~e zoning to R-1D. The Council chose to wait until the 6 month interim ordinance pe~iod is over before making a decision. I . Mr. Samuelson is buying Lot 3 and wants to build a house this su1mer upon the property. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JULY 16, 1985 page four . Planner Nielsen said the lot is nearly 20,000 square feet and if the R-1D zoning is approved the lot will be conforming. Benson moved, Watten seconded, to recommend to Council to appro e the simple subdi~ vision and lot width variance. Motion carried unanimously. 8:00 PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A SPECIAL HOME CCUPATION AND FOR EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE 5085 EUREKA ROAD - BERNARD WHETSON Bernard Whetson and his daughter Gloria were present. Gloria sa d her mother is missing both legs and is legally blind. The bathroom is upstairs. They would like to add a bathroom and a laundry room on first floor to aid Mrs. Whetson She mentioned the home occupation. She said her father has had since 1955, and that he makes very little money. t very small business I Bob Reutiman asked what portion of the house is nonconforming. Planner Nielsen said the front setback from the road. Mr. Reutiman also asked what Ordinance says that if a person is fn business to add on to a nonconforming house that he can't keep on with hif business. , Planner Nielsen said yes, Ordinance 168 Section 200.03. and wants . Several neighbors were present to state they felt it imperative 4hat a bathroom be provided for Mrs. Whetson's use due to her disability. i Neil Mann of 25410 Mann Lane said he has no objection to the addttion but is concerned about the business. His property adjoins Whetson's property in 4he back. He said he has looked at junk vehicles, boat trailers, a pontoon boat, e4c. He would like to know what will be allowed. He also knows that the recommenda4ion is to put all the vehicles in the back yard. I ! I plan to expand his She pointed out that Mr. Whetson's daughter said her father is 60 years old, does not business, and no one else in the family has any interest in it. it only made $500 last year. . Planner Nielsen said no one else can just move in and take over ~he business. Mr. Whetson stated that he will not allow anyone to store anythiJ.g in his yard any- more. In fact he said he is going to put up a gate. Ii ! Mr. Whetson's son Dick said his father started cleaning up his y~rd the day after he received the letter sayihg.he was in violation of the Ordinan e. Planner Nielsen said he did a commendable job and that the yard in not in violat'on at this time. Mr. Mann was upset about the water problem. There is a drainage Iditch running between his property and Mr. Whetson's property. He said that several n~ighbors, including Mr. Whetson and Ron Kramer have put in fill, and the water probl~m in his back yard isgetting worse and worse. He cannot mow the grass. He said th~ water stands in his yard, whereas it drains out of Mr. Whetson's yard within 24 'lours. . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 16, 1985 page five Mr. Whetson's daughter produced pictures showing how bad the Whe is. There was a great deal of contraversy and discussion on thi Reutiman and George Latterner both said it has been a bad proble years. Planner Nielsen suggested that he, the City Engineer and owners look over the property and see how they can solve the pro son water problem issue. Bob for many many the two property lem. Public portion of the Hearing was closed at 9:53 PM. , I A letteri"fIt.'om(John(landscJd.lJ.l,Ma~esJtic, IDIt"Eureka Road sent a letter to the City stating they were against granting the permits. I he has for his f' ork. He said 2 trucks, and a handicap , ehicle and and handicap Chair Leslie asked Mr. Whetson how many vehicles 1 trailer, 1 tractor and the tractor machinery; van that he is working on and may not keep. Mr. Whetson said he wants to find out about a heated garage stal~, to help with the transportation of his wife in the winter. I Ji I Chair Leslie asked Mr. Whetson if he read the Planner's report. I He said he had and can't afford to put up another building, he has made $2,000 sincb the first of the year and asked what he is going to do. I I I Moving the large gravel parking lot in the front yard was discussed. One thing Mr. I Whetson mentioned is that Mr. Rogers (5815 Eureka) would be flooped out because the two of them had laid tile and worked out a drainage across Mr. Wpetson's driveway. Mr. rogers informed the Commission that he had once applied for r dock permit for his yard as a joke, due to his previous water pr9blems. ' Commission discussed the various issues. Watten moved, Reese seconded, to recommend, to Council to permit for a bathroom and laundry room addition. Motion e conditional use unanimously. ve the conditional commendations of Spellman moved, Benson seconded, to recommend to Council use permit for a special home occupation contingent upon the Planner. Motion denied - 2 ayes - 3 nays. I thle front parking lot, Watten suggested that if it,is financially impossilbe to move perhaps screening could be requested. Watten move,d, Benson seconded, t,o recommend to Council that theyrapprove the con~ ditional use permit for a special home occupation contingent upo the following from the Pllanner's recommendation: 3. The parking area in the rear should be confined to the ex~entpossible and screened form adjoining property owners. i 4. The permit is subject to the general and specific require~ents of Section 200.03 Subd. 12. . plus: . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 16, 1985 page six The front parking lot may be retained with the agreement that on driveway be provided at the north end of the lot and one driveway be provided at the south end of the lot; and that the area between the two driveways be, planted to screen the rest of the park- ing area; that the garage doors be relocated to the back of the garage; and that these be accomplished within 1 year. Motion carried - 3 ayes - 2 nays. Mr. Whetson said he has some railroad ties that he can also use 0 help in the screen- ing of the parking area. DEVELOPMENT STAGE APPROVAL - GIDEONS ORCHARD P.U.D. f 5620 COUNTY ROAD 19 - KRISTIN SPENCER-BARNEY FOR WELLSLEY HOMES NC. Kristin Spencer-Barney and Tom Barney were present. She pointed out that they are working to comply with the Planner's recommendations and have ma~e some changes. The plans are being altered to move the setbacks on the commerCif' 1 property; 24 park- ing spaces are being added at the suggested point; they are put ing in a boat/tra, iler parking area screened with lombardi poplars; they have talked t Hennepin County and will set an appointment about the utilities when necessary. I They plan to get water from Tonka Bay. I but a~ he was given a choice recomtendation to have a I I fhe RV's and boats Mr. Barney said he understands the City Engineers concern, in the matter, he prefers to go along with his architect's pump station. Mr. Barney showed some concern over having a hard surface where will be stored, he would rather see gravel with curbing. i Watten moved, Spellman seconded, to recommend to Council to apprfve the Development Stage contingent upon the recommendations of the Planner that tht applicant should be directed to prepare a final plan incorporation the recommendatiots contained in the Planner's report of 11 July 1985, and those of the City Engineer Hennepin County, and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Motion carried unan mously. FIRE LANES I Planner Nielsen said the following are still to be considered, o~ done: , , He still has to talk to the Mound Fire Marshall. Some or the concerns mentioned at the Public Hearing still hav1 to be dealt with. I He mentioned the fact that Commissioner Spellman had mentionedlthe problems that were brought up on Timber Lane (the platted street that is bei~g used for public access), and the Shady Island bridge. Brad also mentioned Chr~stmas Lake Road. The question is to possibly consider these as a 4th category uryder fire lanes, or put them in the street ordinance. (Shady Island bridge arealincludes Enchanted Island and Shady Island Road. More emphasis on the rules and regulations, de-emphasis on pub~ic access. Encourage neighborhood use. Planner Nielsen said the RV Ordinance and Expansion of be discussed at the next study session. Nonconfro1ing I Structures wi 11 . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 16, 1985 page seven Commission worked on the Fire Lane Ordinance Draft and the fOllot: ing is what was done: Subd. 19 b. (1) remove swimming. (2) add after -'Class I" except fishing and add limming as a designated activity. I (3) (a) change "person or group of persons to S orewood resident(s) (b) add "The total length of the dock" New (e) LMCD compliance New (f) The in- the Ie that build the dock are respo sible covera e, and this covera e must be a the dock is allowed. d. (a) change to (1) (b) to (2) and Ordinance 91 changed to ~rdinance 140 and s of use, use of motorized vehicles (c) change (d) change New (5) No New (6) Da of boats between sunrise an sunset. Talk to Tonka Bay About obile access at Crescent Beach - B ad MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR none REPORTS Liaison Stover gave the Counc'l report. ADJOURNMENT ied unanimously. Watten moved, Spellman second d, to adjourn at 11:03. Motion M I NUT E S COUNCIL! CHAMBERS 5755 COfNTRY CLUB 7:30 PM I ! ROAD . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, AUGUST 6, 1985 CALL TO ORDER Chairman Leslie called the meeting to order at 7:30 PM. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Leslie, commissioners Spellman, Benson, and Sl:;hultz; Planner Nielsen and Deputy clerk NiCCUm.,Commissionfr Reese Commissioner Watten (ex) I ! I (late) Absent: APPROVAL OF MINUTES I Spellman movedJ Benson seconded, to approve the minutes of JUlyl 16, 1985 as amended. Motion carried unanimously. , 7:30 PUBLIC HEARING-CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SETBACK VARIANCE' ROY AHERN -5540. SHORE ROAD (LOT 11) : Note-Continuation of Public Hearing was because the DNR had to ~e notified before TIle-Public Hearing-they have now been notified. . Mf~ Anern was present to state he wishes to build a single-fami~y home on the . property. He said he has worked with the Planner to make sure ~verything is correct on the house plan, survey, energy calculation, etc. 1 : Planner Nielsen said becaus.e t.he lot is substandard a condition~l use permit and a 10 foot lake setbackl:[e1ap~quired. All Radisson Inn A ddi~ion r.esidents have easements over the property. The City Attorney's advice w s that the easement problem is a private matter between the residents and he owner, and the Commission can only discuss the conditional use permit, nd variance. Brad said according to Section 200.03 Subd. relating to allowing a building permit on a following 4 conditions comply: 2C (3) and Section f.00.26 suhstandard lot (151,670). Subd. 5 b, the 1. The lot is separately owned. 2. : the area of the f~ot requirement. , I I All setbacks are met due to the fact that (Section 2001.26 Subd. 5 a) "Where development exists on both sides of a proposed puilding site, building setbacks may be altered to more closely confo~m to adjacent building setbacks" (allowing 63 feet). I The ratio of the proposed structure to lot area is 9%,j not exceeding the 30% limitation. The lot exceeds the width requirement by 10 feet and lot is 78% (15,670 square feet) of the 20,000 square 3. 4. . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 6, 1985 page two RESIDENT COMMENT DAVID WALKER - 20485 RADISSON ROAD Why was lot 11, the only lot without a home on it, given ease~ent? To provide access. The homeowners have maintained the property. If Mr. Hayes can't build on it, why can someone else? I submitted a bid f r $13,000, asked for the lot and was turned down. The City has a choice, they can grant the permit and be take~ to court or deny the permit and Mr. Ahern will probably take them to court. The City should support its residents. I can't believe anyone would want to move into a neighborhood knowing they'd be the most despised person in the neighborhood. GERALD HAYES -5550 SHORE ROAD Lot 11 was owned by my family and they chose not to build a hpuse on it. The people of Radisson Inn Addition were given three weeks t~ bid on the property. Mr. Walker's bid for $13,000 came in after the thr~e week period, The property was sold to Mr. Ahern for $13,100. ! & boat anchora~e been allowed. I was the . The use of the lot, as far as picnics, sports, owner's choice. Boat anchorage has not always When the property sold, the taxes were $700. ROBERT SEGAL - 20555 RADISSON INN ROAD Mr. Segal said you can't get a conditional use permit or nce just by asking for it. He expected both sides of the argument to be elated by the City and was disappointed to only hear one side. He refe red to 200.03 Subd. 1, dealing with "Non-conforming Buildings, Struct res, and Uses", saying there are certain things you have to comply with. This includes the asthetics, character of adjacent property; by putting a h me on Lot 11, the view of several residents would be obstructed, th character of the zone would be changed. As Mr. Walker pointed out, the easement, not described as a corridor, is written into everyone of 26 ~eeds. . , , The garage on the Hayes property obstructs parking on what is! supposed to be an open road, I wonder if it would be wise to make a mista~e twice7 Is this family dwelling for profit, or is Mr. Ahern going to jlive in it personally? 1 , I If a home is now put on that property, the gentleman has paidra $12,000 tax base for 10 years, a $1 tax base for the preceding 30 yea s. Every home in the adjacent area, probably all 26, will lose money, and the City of Shorewood presumably would lose a quarter of a millior dollars in I ! PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 6, 1985 . page three ROBERT SEGAL - 20555 RADISSON INN ROAD (Continued) I feel that the tax values of our houses have been increased lot and I feel we have helped to pay for this lot. he maYOr may not ~ue to this their tax base in order for Mr. Ahern to have a home live in. MRS. SEGAL MR. AHERN - OWNER OF LOT 11 I'm not a developer, and never have been in the real estate b The house is for my personal use. I feel that I'll pay more create more money for the City. siness. axes and RUSS STUART - 20505 RADISSON INN ROAD This lot has been advertised in the paper for $100,000. If M~. Ahern paid $13,100 for it and is going to live on it, why is it advertised? It doesn't make sense. i . FRED GARCIA - 20430 RADISSON INN ROAD It is nice to have the parklike property there. It was used rs point when the 26 lots were sold. It will change the charactler neighborhood and devalue our property. i I I PAUL SEIFERT - 5515 RADISSON ENTRANCE i a selling of the , Mr. Seifert presented a letter written on behalf of the Radisson Inn Association (see attachment). Mr. Seifert commended Brad and the Planning Commission on the jobs they are doing. - ~ He feels that the existing homes on either side of Lot 11 we e built when no setbacks were required, and that a new house should ave to follow the 75 foot setback. . He said according to Frank lallon, President, the Christmas Lake Association supports the Radisson Inn Association very strongly. Gary Mize asked me to speak for him also. MR. AHERN - OWNER OF LOT 11 . The land has been used improperly by people in the past. they think they should get some use of it in the future. registered land, torrenized, and I don't believe there's Besause of this, Th~1 land is any time limit on I I 4It 4It 4It PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 6, 1985 page four MR. AHERN - OWNER OF LOT 11 (Continued) land use. I'm requesting the variance because the law says its allowable. The lot on one side, and the lots behind the property are all smaller. PAT AUBRECHT - 20575 RADISSON INN ROAD We understood that the road extended across Lot 11. Eventually, we plan to put a foundation under our house and planned to bring necessary mach- inery in by this route. JOE JOYCE - 5550 SHORE ROAD Mr. Joyce is Mr. Hayes'brother-in-law. He served as treasu er of the family investment company. He said a substantial portion of the expense and taxes were paid by the Hayes family. I If the variance is not granted, who is going to pay yearly e1penses of approximately $2000, and what are you going to let Mr. Ahern do with it? ROBERT SEGAL This property was originally purchased to enhance the sale Of! 26 other lots. If that lot is changed it will severely damage everyone of ~he other 26 lots. : Maybe a solution would be for Mr. Ahern to talk to the 26 ot~er families and set up some kind of accommodation. DONNA WATTS - 20520 RADISSON INN ROAD Mr. Ahern offered to sell the lot to her father for $100,000 telephone conversation. [in a recent COMMISSION DISCUSSION Spellman asked , why couldn 't lot be set back 10 feet further l,sO it would meet requirements? Planner Nielsen said it would not meet requirements. a variance on the street side. It woul~ then need I I , Leslie asked what the numbers are. I sletback and a I Planner Nielsen said 25' or more side setbacks, a 35' front 65' back setback. Schultz to Mr. Ahern recognlzlng the conflict here, have having the courts decide what the deeded easement rights to the City? you ~onsidered are ~efore coming I I I I . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 6, 1985 page five COMMISSION DISCUSSION (Continued) Mr. Ahern said the City Attorney, who was Attorney at time o~ property purchase, told him the land was buildable. If I have to take it to court in order to build a house on it, I will. If the variance is he only problem, I can come up with a modified or different house plan. I Schultz - Do you have any problem with the Planner's recommenrlations? I i I Ahern - I am willing to go along with all of them. ~ Schultz moved, Benson seconded, to continue the Public Hearing, leaving it open for public discussion, until August 20, 1985. Motion carr"ed unanimously. Commission informed residents that they will not receive anothef public notice. 7:45 PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SETBACK VARIAN E PAUL NELSON - 27120 EDGEWOOD ROAD Mr. Nelson appeared to request permission to build a "mud room"l on the east side of his house. The addition would increase the non-conformity. I He said the room would be 4'10" wide without the variance and he felt this was tpo narrow. He said the neighbors approve. I The public portion closed at 9:06 PM. Planner Nielsen said he does not object to the length being lon~1 er. to app ove the carrie unanimously. i Spellman moved, Benson seconded, to recommend to Council conditional use permit and to deny the variance. Motion APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JUNE 18, 1985 COMMISSIONER REESE ARRIVED AT 9:08. I I I I ~8, 1985<as Spellman moved, Reese seconded, to approve the'Minutes of June written. Motion carried unanimously. 8:00 PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SETBACK VARIAN E JOHN MEADER - 24425 SMITHTOWN ROAD Mr. Meader was present to state he wishes to use the existing canopy to build a carwash. I brilding I and Spellman moved, Schultz seconded, to recommend to Council to depy the request. i Commission discussed use of site, it is appropriate? Commissior agreed it is. I Benson and Reese felt redesign could make it safer and prevent ~tacking problem. I , . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 6, 1985 page six JOHN MEADER - 24425 SMITHTOWN ROAD (Continued) Commission felt canopy and stalls are proposed too close to rad. Spellman and Schultz retracted their motion to deny. Commission and Planner suggested redesign of the site plans and presentation of the signage plans. Bruce moved, Spellman seconded, to table the public hearing for not more than 90 days to allow redesign of the site plans. Motion carried un nimously. SIMPLE SUBDIVISION ROBERT PICHA - 5930 SEAMAN'S DRIVE Mr. Picha appeared to request division of R-1A property, 152,29P square feet in area, into 3 lots, his home on 1 lot to be a 72,450 square fpot lot and the other two to be 40,000 square feet each. I' Spellman moved, Schultz seconded, to recommend to council that they approve the simple subdivision contingent upon the Planner's six following recommendations: 1. At 33 feet, the right-of-way for Mann Lane is inadequate in width. Consistent with past approvals the City should require t at additional right-of-way be provided. It is suggested that 8.5 feet be required from the applicant. The additional 8.5 needed to achieve 50 feet would come fromthe north side of the street at a later date. 2. The two new lots should be increased in width to make up Ifor the 8.5 feet of r.o.w. 3. Drainage and utility easements must be provided around al'l three lots. 4. the division, the (THis includes the Prior to release of the Council resolution approving applicant should pay $1000 in park dedication fees. credit for the existing house.) 5. The applicant must submit an up-to-date title opinion on It he property for review and approval by the City Attorney. I 6. The applicant must record the division with Hennepin COU1ty after he receives the resolution approving the division. Motion carried unanimously. I within 30 days . . . PLANNING.COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 6, 1985 page seven 8:30 PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT Benson moved, Spellman seconded, to amend the Agenda, to discus item 6, to be followed by item 5. Motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND, REZONING CHARLES CREPEAU - 23425 AND 23445 SMITHTOWN ROAD This hearing was tabled pending formal review of a revised site plan and discussions with the Hennepin County traffic engineer relative 0 driveway accesses. Planner Nielsen and Mr. Crepeau met with Hennepin County Traffi Dave Zetterstrom, who set a minimum of 26' per driveway. As a discussion, Planner Nielsen drew up the following plan: ~ ~ 10'._ __-- i I i i--- I u' I 1'3 I ' [ 10 I I I ~ I u I ,4 I' I" I 17 I I. I I I I I 5 ~Jc.n RIch ~~ I : Engineer esult of that &6. __ ------'1 .t==LitiJrt. Mr. Crepeau objected to having to pave the parking lot and put in curbing. He said the curbing will have to go down so far that the sewer lin will have to be moved. He said the asphalt would involve going 5' deep and he expense would be extremely high. Commissioner Benson asked why he had to go down 5'. Crepeau said to lay a good base so it won't break up: that this ad been rec~m~ended. Commissioner Reese said he felt that mesh and a base ould be suff1c1ent. Commissioner Spellman agreed with Reese. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 6, 1985 page eight Planner Nielsen said blacktopping is necessary; the landscape p an is weak, he would like to see different species and size, plus some ever reens in the screening across the back of the property; and that the parking places shown on the sketch meet parking based on current buildings, when expans'on takes place more spaces can be added for employee parking between the buildings. Reese moved, Spellman seconded, to recommend to Council to appr zoning to C-4; and that the conditional use permit be approved the following: ve the re- ontingent upon 1. That the plan presented by Planner Nielsen be used as a ide. 2. That Mr. Crepeau work with Hennepin County regarding the drives. 3. That the parking lot and curbing be done according to the Shorewood Zoning Ordinance. 4. That the finished landscaping plan be approved by the plarner. I Zoning ,rdinance. I I 5. That the signage be consistent with the Shorewood Motion carried unanimously. 8:30 PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT Commission discussed the proposed ordinance. They felt a single sign size should be limited to prevent a billboard or other oversize sign. Reese moved, Spellman seconded, to recommend to Council that t ey approve the Ordinance regarding construction signs with the addition that 0 single sign be allowed to exceed 192 square feet (plus posts). Motion carried unanimously. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR None REPORTS Sue gave the Park Commission Report. ADJOURNMENT Benson moved, Spellman seconded, to adjourn at 10:45 PM. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED Sue Niccum Deputy Clerk }Yo-. . J. Paul Seifert . July 29,-1985 Dear Planning Commission Members: I I am writing on behalf of Radission Inn Ass. home owners wit~ "deeded lake access" to Christmas Lake through Lot 11 - easement lott We realize that the main issue before the Planning Commission is whethet special I priviledges in the form of varriance and conditional use shotld be granted to Mr. Ahern and thereby allow him to build a home on Lot 11~ In this . letter we will address reasons for denying varriance and confitional use and we will also address a third reason for denying construc~ion; i.e., ! Lot 11 is and has been for over 45 years an easement lot to fhristmas Lake. Approximately fifteen homes are affected directly by this issue, and another fifteen affected indirectly. JUd a home on Brad Nielson has advised us that in order for Mr. Ahern to I I Lot 11 he needs a varriance due to his proposed home being approximately I 65 feet from the lake, and he needs a conditional use due tol the lot size I of approximately 13,000 square feet. We urge rejection of h~s request for . the following reasons. 1. According to the new Shorewood Zoning Ordinance, a mini~m of 20,000 I square feet in lot size is required. Proposed site is approlximately 13,000, considerably less than required. I 2. Seven homes cluster around Lot 11. All have remained s~stantially ! unchanged since 1940, when Lot 11 was created as an easemen~ lot for . approximately 30 homes. We urge preservation of the qualit~ and character of our neighborhood. 5515 Radisson Entrance' Shorewood, Minnesota 55531 . 612 - 474 - 3611 r" 0 ~ . . . . 3. Proposed used is totally incompatible with past, present, ~nd future uses of LOtl1. This is an easement lot created in 1940 and sotd to the existing and future home owners in 1940 for the sum of a dolla. The i current appraised value of Lot 11 is approximately $12,000, no~ the value of a buildable lot on Christmas Lake but rather the value of at easement existenanee it has hern appraised lot. Throughout this property's 45 year as an easement lot. 4. The building of an permanent structure on Lot 11 would SUbstantiallY reduce the property values of all homes with easement rights. Although realtor opinions differ, most agree conservitively that the lid, eded lake ! accell" to Christmas Lake represents an increased valuation to! the affected properties of 10%. This translates to a dollar valuation of approximate~y $12,000. I I 5. The property to the immediate West of Lot 11 sought simil~r priviledges as Mr. Ahern; i.e., ~he sellers requested a splitting pf the i property into two lots for building site purposes. The Shore~ood City Council rejected this request due to lot size and also becausJ the lots I were combined for 40 years to gain tax advantage. 6. The special priviledges requested by Mr Ahern are not new lor surprizing. Rather, he has knowingly and willfully created special condit~ons and circumstances for himself. Several years ago he purchaSedlO) 11 for $12,000/theA~1Calue for an unbuildable ease .ent lot. Least approximately you think he was fooled then, he has, on a continuous basis fdr over five years, refused to discuss selling the property at a reasonabl~ price to Radisson Inn Ass, easement owners of lot 11. To those of us iqvolved, we label this another attempt by a non-resident builder/land dev~loper to "cut I . a fat profit" by manipulating city ordinances at the expense c)f our neighborhood character and property valuation. . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, AUGUST 20, 1985 COUNCIL CAMBERS 5755 COUN Y CLUB ROAD 7:30 PM M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER Chair Leslie called the meeting to order at 7:37 PM. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Leslie, Commissioners Reese, Spellman, Benso , Schultz, and Mason; Council Liaison Stover; Planner Nielsen and Deputy clerk Niccum. Absent: commissioner Watten (business) APPROVAL OF MINUTES (AUGUST 6, 1985) i amented. I I ! Motion Schultz moved, Benson seconded, to approve the minutes as carried unanimously. NEW COMMISSION MEMBER Chair Leslie introduced and welcomed Pat Mason, the new Plannitg Commissioner. ZONING ORDINANCE - PARKING/STORAGE OF RECREATIONAL VEHICLES I Planner Nielsen and Chair Leslie explained that the Recreationt'l Vehicle Ordinance is a study session item, so most likely no action wi 1 be taken this evening as this is the first time the commission has seen it. Jerry Doboszenski ... 4955 St. Albans Bay Road - Why was this stjrted? Planner Nielsen - explained that during the time the Planning ommission was going through the Zoning Ordinance, a number of complaints were rece ved regarding the storage and parking of recreational vehicles and equipmen. Because of those complaints, we felt that the Zoning Ordinance had to add ess them. Reali- zing that Shorewood is a community where it is characteristic to have these things, there is no desire on the part of the City to prohibit these but merely to regulate them, specify where these items could occur within residential zoning districts. The way it's currently written is that thos items be stored within the buildable area of the lot. This has apparently bec me a problem for some people, and that is what has generated this series of stu y sessions, because some people cannot meet these qualifications. Mr. War en Peterson has provided us with some sample ordinances from Albuquerque, New exico and Vallejo, California which suggest some other possible ways of tegulation. That's what we're here to discuss tonite, whether we should rf'Vise the Ordinance to accommodate more boats and motor homes, whether we should 1 ave it alone, or what we should do. Jerry Doboszenski - said he can park his according to regulati~n but it would be facing the corner and would not look good. His question was w~ether there was a time limit on how long it could remain parked in one place. I , . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, AUGUST 20, 1985 page two Planner Nielsen said the only time tpat is an issue is if thejvehiCle is being lived in. Jerry Doboszenski asked what is wrong! with parking a motor hom ? Planner Nielsen said to some degree ai large motor or any other no different from a garage or a build~ng, a 30 foot long motor imposing vehicle. The question is if! you allow that, why not some other type of building? That's why we went to the setbac so we could impose the same requireme~ts on these as we could large vehicle is home is a very llow a garage or requirement, n buildings. Planner Nielsen said he would like to' get a survey on what oth r similar commun- ities in the area are doing, and present the information to th Commission. He pointed out some items worthy of discussion in the above mejtioned I I I Ordinances. The Albuquerque Ordinance pointed outl: Outside parking in the front yard, provided: (a) Space is not available or there is no reasonable acce s to either the side yard or rear yard. A corner lot is always deeme to have reason- able access. (b) Inside parking is not possib1e (c) front curb. I boat is a1: leait 11 feet from the The unit is parked perpendicular to the (d) The body of the recreational vehicle or face of the curb, and I (e) did not apply. ! The Vallejo Ordinance did not really ~pply to the type of orditance we are trying to set up; it deals more with overnight or long time Ii ing use. The third model Ordinance presented s~ggested: ! (a) No vehicle shall be stored i~ the required front or sjde setback area of any residential lot excep~ on a driveway. T I Planner Nielsen said this is simiR., ar to our Ordinance exce~.t that it does allow a vehicle or RV to park in a driveway and goes on to I define what a driveway is. ; i I I recreation vehicle, while larked or stored ( b) No recreation vehicle, except a self-contained shall be used for purposes o~ human habitation on any residential lot. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, AUGUST 20, 1985 page three (c) No self-contained recreation vehicle shall be used fo human habitation while parked or stored on any reside a receptacle approved by law for the discharge of liq solid wastes shall be provided on such residential lo period of time not to exceed 72 continuous hours. the purposes of tial lot unless id and semi- , except for a Commissioner Schultz asked if the problem is the parking of th vehicle or people living in the vehicles. Planner Nielsen said although there have been complaints aboutlpeoPle living in them, and this should be addressed in the Ordinance, the main trOblem is large recreation vehicles or equipment parked in front yards, actual y more complaints have been received on boats than motor homes. i Planner Nielsen said problems appear more on the smaller lots, I because of more lack of room. ! I A petition was received from sixteen residents requesting a reliSion of the Zoning Ordinance passed May 28, 1985 regarding the storage of ecreational vehicles and equipment. The question was asked if the Ordinance could be left the way t is, and have people with size problems apply for a variance? Planner Nielsen said the problem with that is it is hard to a necessity. maie I t~ I a luxury item Cathy Peterson - 23660 Gillette Curve said people would like on their property. put their property David Walker - 20485 Radisson Inn Road pointed out that a 10tlOf retiring people these days are selling their homes and buying motor homes to t avel south in the winter, then coming back here in the summer, and that he feels these people should be considered. He also said that most people in this area do ot consider boats a luxury, but rather a way of life. I Roger Devereaux - 25670 Smithtown Road wondered about the visufl aspect, whether it is a view obstruction or people just don't like the looks. He wondered if screening, such as fencing or plantings, could be considered. Planner Nielsen said Chanhassen has a screening Ordinance. ! Planner Nielsen.said one suggestion might be that if they weretallowed to park in front, it would have to be in a driveway and the driveway w uld have to be acceptable. He said most complaints concerning the front yard parking wererbecause the recreational vehicle or equipment was too close to the lot lin of the person issuing the complaint. I I I I I . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST 20, 1985 page four Lisa Wendt - 23735 Gillette Curv~ - suggested leaving the Ordi'ance but allowing conditional use permits for a three year period, if there were no objection within that time, the permit could be renewed at the end of the three year period. Planner Nielsen said a conditional use permit sounded better t an a variance. If we could sit down and figure out under what circumstances i is okay to have one and what kind of conditions on the site have to exist Planner Nielsen said the next step is to get the survey from fther Cities, put some of the comments discussed into the ordinance, and see if je can modify it. Y1anner Nielsen informed the residents that they are always w1come to come into City Hall, look over the material and ask questions. PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE - CONTINUED FROM 6 AUGUST ROY AHERN - 5540 SHORE ROAD (LOT 11) The reason for the continuation of this hearing is that a lettEr had to be sent to the DNR. Planner Nielsen sent the letter, and talked to Judy loudreau of their office. She turned it over to DNR attorneys , who decided they have no opposition to the conditional use permit or the variance, and that the easement question should be a separate issue. They will send a letter as a follow-up on this. . Mr. Ahern presente,d a new plan for a very contemporary structu1,e that would fit upon the lot without a variance. He is still requesting the v riance, he said he talked to a couple architects and they said the house would have to be angled and that's why the contemporary home had been designed. He w9u1d prefer to build the house on the first plan he presented. I . Dr. Robert Segal - 20555 Radisson Inn Road said he lives direc1'lY behind Lot 11. He reviewed the information presented at the last meeting. He also mentioned some things that were not brought out at the last meeting. He ,said Mr. Seifert had approached Mr. Ahern shortly after he bought the lot and ojfered him significantly more than Mr. Ahern had paid for the lot, Mr. AhErn said he would not sell the lot for less than $80,000. The homeowners in the area have paid insurance, maintained the lot and the 1akeshore. Mr. Ahern hac offered to sell the lot to two local residents for $100,000. The offer was wi1hdrawnwhen they identified themselves as local residents. He feels that no structure should be built on the lot, that it~WOU1d obstruct the view of several homeowners, affect the value of their home , and that the City should consider the 26 present residents before they appr ve the building of this house. I Paul Aubrecht - 20575 Radisson Road said he lives adjacent to he lot, and felt they could buy their home with some assurance that no home cou d be built on the lot because it was too small, and said he would like to see thE Planning Com- mission enforce its own rules. He brought up the comparison bEtween this and the previously mentioned Recreational Vehicle and Equipment Or<inance which referred to obstruction of view. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST 20, 1985 page five Chair Leslie said that is what the residents will can't. have to figU1,ee to do when ~ Phyllis Burns asked what the tax assessor is going The Public Hearing was closed at 9:00. the home could t interfere out the vegetation. e Shoreline depreciation , unreasonably ood. He said enhance the out, the City comes around. Spellman moved, Benson seconded, to recommend to Council that he variance be denied. Roll call vote - Reese-nay, Spellman-aye, Leslie-n y, Benson-aye, Mason-aye, Schultz-nay ---this resulted in a tie vote, therefo e, the Planning Commission neither recommends nor denies the variance~ Reese moved, Schultz seconded, to recommend to Council that th conditional use permit be approved contingent upon the three following rec mmendations of the Planner: I Existing site vegetation should be shown on the site ~lan. selective cutting of trees and underbrush will be all wed. removal of any existing vegetation it should be marke and ensure compliance with the Ordinance. I The grading plan should be subject to review and appr~val of the City Engineer. The grading plan must be modified so that ~o grading occurs within 20 feet of the normal high water mark. ' 1. 2. Only Prior to inspected to . . . I I I I I I 3. Erosion control ~ust he provided during construction. I Erosion control methods should be shown on the grading plan and approied by the City Engineer. Roll call vote: Schultz-aye, Reese-aye, Leslie-aye, Benson-naJ,' Spellman-aye, and Mason-aye. Motion carried 5 ayes, 1 nay. -I PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST 20, 1985 page six MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR I Fire Lanes - Chair Leslie asked when fire lanes are going to be discussed. Planner Nielsen said they will be discussed at an up~oming study session; he will let the Commission know. REPORTS Council Liaison gave the Council Rep0rt. Deputy Clerk Niccum gave the Park Report. ADJOURNMENT Benson moved, Reese seconded, to adjourn at 9:50 PM. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Sue Niccum Deputy Clerk . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISION MEETING TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 3, 1985 MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Acting Chairman Reese called the meeting to order at 7:3 PM. ROLLCALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:30 PM Present: Acting Chair Reese, Commissioners Benson, Sp llman, Watten and Mason; Council Liaison Stover; Planner Nielsen and eputy Clerk Niccum. Absent: Chairman Leslie and Commissioner Schultz (bo h excused) APPROVAL OF MINUTES Spellman moved, Benson seconded, to approve the minutes written. Motion carried unanimously. 7:30 PUBLIC HEARING - SETBACK VARINACES AND VARIANCE TO STRUCTURE - AMERICAN POST #259 - 2 Mr. Guy Streater and Mr. Paul Christensen appeared be for request two setback variances, one 13' front yard setbac setback variance; and two variances to expand a nonconf for each addition. Mr. Streater explained that they had not expected to nee agreement had been made with Mr. Horace Murfin several y would furnish his!prbperty with wilter from their well, i an eighteen foot strip along the west side of the Murfin Mr. Streater said all the papers were drawn up, presente Murfin has the property for sale and has decided not to Legion. Mr. Streater said the Murfin property will be w Planner Nielsen submitted a sketch to the Commission sho tion can be moved to the north which would make it fit w said the building would be two feet narrower, but it wou act,lLICilily gain in square footage. He also showed diagona He informed the Legion representatives that he was not s particular sketch, that it was only to show how things c Commission discussed whether the Legion would have e~oug Christensen said they have already discussed leasing pro ing lot to necessary size. Planner Nielsen said that the Ordinance allows off-site a conditional use permit or a long term commitment. The Public portion of the hearing was closed at 8 :00 PM. , f TueSdar' August 20, as XPAND A NONCONFORMING 450 SMIT~TOWN ROAD ! the Com~ission to and onef 10' side yard rming st~ucture, one I a side betback, that an ars ago !hat the Legion return e would deed property to the Legion. to Mr. urfin, and Mr. ive the roperty to the thout wa~er soon. ing how ~he banquet addi- thin thel setbacks. He d be longer, so they would parking ~' on the sketch. ggesting they use this uld be d ne. parkingLspaces. Mr. erty to rxtend the park- I I r sharedlparl<i:I1.K-l.l~der ---I I . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 3, 1985 page two Spellman moved, Benson seconded, to recommend tb Council to;denr the setback variances. Motion to deny carried by roll call vote: Reese/aYi' Spellman/aye, Watten/abstain, Benson/aye, and Mason/aye. I I Council Liaison Stover asked Planner Nielsen how much room per ~erson was needed for the large addition in relation to parking. Planner NIelsenlsaid: , 1 per 40 square feet for banquet and bar 1 1 per 80 square feet for kitchen I 1 per 200 square feet for offices I Benson moved, seconded by Spellman, to recommend to Council to fllow the variances to expand the nonconforming structures. Motion carried unanimtusly by roll call vote: Spellman/aye, Watten/aye, Benson/aye, Mason/aye, and Reere/aye. Council Liaison Stover asked how many square feet are needed pet person to tell how many people can be present. Watten said 15 sq. ft. in dinig room, 10 sq. ft. in banquet room. JOHN MEADER - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SETBACK VARIANCE - CON INUED FROM MEETING OF AUGUST 6, 1985 - 24425 SMITHTOWN ROAD Mr. John Meader and Mr. Larry Kollmeyer, Mr. Meader's architectt were present to explain what has been done since they last appeared before the rommission. Planner Nielsen said that a new plan has been submitted, and greatly improved. I thr the plan is back variances. have redrawn 11 farthest tall will have rance to the west ndle two-way John Meader explained that they have eliminated the need for se They are going to totally remove the existing sttilidtures. They their plans so they will have 4 stalls instead of three, the st south will be a larger stall for larger vehicles. The largest a door 10' high, the other three doors will be 9' high. The en has been removed, with a wider entrance to the east that will h traffic. The traffic direction will be clearly marked. wash will go. ~r. Meader said will be strainer before doing so. Planner Nielsenl said the City is maintained, i~ is acceptable. Commission asked where the run~off from the car it will go directly into the sewer, and that it Commission also asked about property drainage. Engineer has said that if the present drainage i Parking was shown on the submitted plan with three spaces. one[ more space is needed. Planner Nielsen said they can either put another space on the north end of the building, or run four parking spaces along the southj' rn end of the west side. . . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 3, 1985 page three Planner Nielsen said he felt more screening and landscaping shoul He suggested evergreens or a hedge along the east side, and more the front. He siad that the car coming out of the last stall mee area to make the turn. Commission discussed the issue and sugges northwest corner and widening the area from the west side of the eight feet, gradually swinging it back in. Commissioner Watten s the above two areas. It was also suggested that the east side of be moved farther east to widen the driveway more. be provided. andscaping in s the present ed widening the ntrance to about ggested berming the driveway Watten moved, Spellman seconded, to recommend to Council to appro e the conditional use permit contingent upon the following: I 1. Four parking spaces be provided, either with the three shown pn the plan plus one at the north end of the building, or four spaces along thr! south end of the west side. 2. A hedge or evergreens be placed along the east side to prOVid~ better screening. That the northwest corner and the area from the west side of he driveway be widened, with the area west of the driveway gradually swingin back in to leave enough clearance for the car exiting form the last stall. 3. 4. That the two above .mentioned areas be bermed. 5. That the area to the east of the driveway be extended farther east to widen the driveway. Motion carried unanimously. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR Commissioner Reese suggested that the Plymouth sign ordinance be studied and Commissioner Watten suggested Plymouth's landscaping ordinance be studied. REPORTS Ah~rn, I , [ I I I I i the garbage Council Liaison Stover gave the Council report on Lot 11~ Roy ordinance, and Crepeau (continued). ADJOURNMENT Watten moved, Spellman seconded, to adjourn at 9:07 PM. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED Sue Niccum Deputy Clerk . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 1985 COUNCILfCHAMBERS 5755 CO NTRY CLUB ROAD 7 : 30 P. . M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER Chair Leslie called the meeting to order at 7:36 PM. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Leslie, Commissioners Reese, Spellman, Benson ar. d Schultz: Planner Nielsen and Deputy Clerk Niccum. I Absent: i Commissioners Watten (Business) and Mason (Excused).1 i APPROVAL OF MINUTES I Schultz moved, Benson seconded, to approve the minutes as written~ unanimously. I Motion carried PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE - CHRISTMAS ~AKE ACCESS PROPOSAL CHRISTMAS LAKE ASSOCIATION - 5695 MERRY LANE r Mr. Frank Fallon, President of the Christmas Lake Association addlessed the Commission stating that there had been more detailed analysis on ~heir proposal than they had had expected at this time. Basically, they are submitti g a proposal to have the present owner donate the land, and that the Christmas La e Assocation and some benefactors provide the full cost of developing the site for public access on Christmas Lake. He said it has become clear from review from ity staff and Attorney that there are a number of thitigs to be considered that hey cannot answer at this time. He said they are committed to workiug with the Sta f and neighbors to straighten out any probl~ms. They are here primarily to hear roblems so they can try to work them out. The Christmas Lake Association feels it would be to both their be~efit and the City's benefit to have the access on Christmas Lake under City coptrol. I They feel that the suggested access would generate less use, beca~se it would not i be as visible. ! They also feel that Mrs. Brooks would be treated more fairly if t~e access was on Merry Lane, as the DNR access would affect valuation of her prope ty. He mentioned that the lots on either side would probably become unbuildable, a d that this in turn could possibly create enlargement of the DNR access, thus cr~ating more upkeep and policing problems for the City. I Mr. Fallon said the land and development cost of the Christmas Lale Access would be free to the City. He did mention that if another access is opened onto Christmas Lake Association would take back their access. I Lare, the Christmas . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 1985 page two He introduced Mr. Steve Bruce, coordinator of the project, and Mr the architect. Daryl Fortier, The Planning Commission received letters from Interstudy and the tonights meeting. ty Attorney at CJ.i};ol Anderson of 5725 Merry Lane said there is only one entranc private road approximately 10' wide. She is very concerned about condition will be and how having a public access right below them property value. She referred to the letter her husband had sent , and this is a what the road will do to their o the City. Jean McGee, representing the City Staff Report is Nielsen gave her a copy. the Brooks property also Interstudy at 5715 Christmas for public knowledge. Chair She said she feels that the pertain to the owners around Lake Road. q Leslie said arguments:; the propose. estioned whether yes and Planner ertaining to Merry Lane access. Ms. McGee mentioned the letter Irtterstudy had sent to the City. She mentioned that Interstudy does not have anyone present on wee~ends, and this is when the access would be most heavily used. She said they felt very strongly about screening to protect Interstudy because it would be easy tOluse Interstudy property for overflow parking and could cause extensive vandalism problems. She said the trailer/car parking is cut from 10 spaces proposed b the DNR to three spaces. i I She also said she realizes that although the DNR access is more v~sible, she doesn't feel, with all the publicity received, that it will make that much I difference in amount of use. I , I Interstudy feels that the design has several real problems, inc.luring accessibili ty and affect upon surrounding property owners. Frank Fallon said they would like to create the access because inlorder for the DNR to condemn property, there can be no other access on the lake. I He said the facility they have designed with parking for 13 cars ~nd 3 would be adequate. It is consistent with their survey over 5 weekends 2.7 power boats on the lake. I PUBLIC PORTION CLOSED AT 7:58 PM. trailers/cars which showed I I I plannrr I I Commissioner Spellman asked about the road, noting that the road ~s over Interstudy property. Commissioner Reese asked which lot the DNR is considering. Christmas Lake Addition, Lot 2. Nielsen said an easement . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 1985 page three Commissioner Reese asked if the DNR had given any response. Pla ner Nielsen said he talked to Judy Boudreau this morning and met with Kathleen Wal ace this after- noon. The DNR has no official comment at this time. They said t at the Commissioner, Mr. Alexander, would likely write a letter relative to the policy of lake access and not specifically addressed to shoreline considerations. Planner Nielsen also said that in his report he raised the questi n of DNR approval of an excavating permit in public water itself. It's possible, a cording to Kathleen Wallace, that a ramp may not need that permit from DNR. Commissiion showed concern over the fact that all of Merry Lane is n easement. Leslie asked how wide the existing gravel road is? Planner Nielsen said it measured 10'-11'. Commissioner Schultz asked if there are any conditions on InterstLdy as long as it's in a residential area. Planner Nielsen said there are a num~er of Conditional Use Permi ts. ' Jean McGee said she was under the understanding that there is soml, thing complex about the 10' easement over Interstudy property_ r Chair Leslie asked Planner N~.'elsen about the con formity of zonin g1' requirements ,'n a Shoreland District, item #2 in the City Attorney's Report. Pla ner Nielsen said a conditional use permit is required to develop a substandard lot in a Shore land District. There are five variances needed in order to implement he plan that's been proposed. , Commissioner Reese asked what expenses the City might get into in'tially. Planner Nielsen said there shouldn't be any as the Association would be h ndling them. Reese asked if the City would be asked to buy a right-of-way to g t to the property. Planner Nielsen said that's certainly a question to be considered. Reese asked if the road had to be improved, who would fo~t those expenses? Mr. allon said the intent of the Association is that there be no expense., outside of maintenance, to the City. Mr. Fallon said the Association is willing to approach the ExecU~ive Committee of the DNR. I Mr. Fallon also mentioned the DNR previously tried to buy the Mer~y Lane proposed I access. Planner Nielsen said the DNR does not have to abide by the City's rules. Commissioner Schultz suggested trying to deal with Interstudy. e also suggested trying to get DNR's cooperation on the proposed access,: with the idea of it still being owned by the City. Keith Harmes, a neighbor, said the Association has tried dealing ~ith the DNR numerous times and this is the reason they have come to the City.1 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 1985 . page four Heidi Larson of 5980 Ridge Road explained how the Association arjived at their figures for 10 car spaces and 3 car/trailer spaces: 260 acres 0 the lake - 1 boat per 10 acres = 26 boats - 13 boats for the DNR & 13 boats for residents. DNR numbers were 2.6 power boats per weekend, this was rounded off to 3 car/trailer spaces. These are DNR figures. . I Schultz moved, Benson seconded, to recommend to Council that the following Resolution be drawn: Resolve that: "The Shorewood Planning Commission endorses the concept of boat launch owned by the City, located on Christmas Lake, Merry Lane (with parking for up to three cars with trailer cars ,with trailers) subject, however, to a roval of the r site design with evidence of an attempt to gain DNR suppor and with the understanding that there will be an additiona prior to which surrounding land owners will be notified." donated public djacent to and up to 10 ad access and for the proposal public hearing, Motion carried unanimously by roll call vote (Leslie, Spellman, and Schultz,. Rees1' Benson, cond1tional Use Permit I Motion (Benson) seconded (Schultz) to table decision on the and variances for no more than 60 days. M.C.U. . STUDY SESSION STORAGE OF BOATS AND R.V.'S - CONTINUED DISCUSSION Planner Nielsen reported that there are more regulations than the~R'V' people indicated. Four of the six communities he has contacted so far h ve R.V. regulations. Plymouth, Eden Prairie, and Minnetonka do not have ny regulations. Woodbury Orono Edina - breaks it down by zoning district. ~' - has some - will send ordinance. They have Estate Zo ing which allows R.V.'s up to 24' in length. This is limited to one iece per dwell- ing (a boat & trailer count as one piece. This mean~ they cannot have both a boat and an R.V. They have to be parked on an estab'iAhed driVeWay,' 3 feet from the property line, or if in frnt, on established driveway, they must be 15' from the curb. - in the process of rev~s~ng their ordinance. currentllY, they allow one parking in driveway or the garage. , MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR None. REPORTS Norie. . ADJOURNMENT Benson moved, Schultz seconded, to adjourn at 9:20 P.M. Motion cFrried unanimously. I I RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Sue Niccum Deputy Clerk . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, OCTOBER 1, 1985 I COUNCI~ CHAMBERS 5755 CqUNTRY CLUB ROAD ],30 Pl i M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER Chair Leslie called the meeting to order at 7:30 PM. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Leslie, Commissioners Spellman, Watten, Benson, $chultz and Mason; Council Liaison Stover; Planner Nielsen and Deputy Clelk Niccum Absent: Commissioner Reese (excused) APPROVAL OF MINUTES Spellman moved, Schultz seconded, to approve the minutes as amendel. Motion carried unanimously. II 7:30 PUBLIC HEARING - SIMPLE SUBDIVISION AND VARIANCE HOWARD SHENEHON/MARY GOODLUND -5285 SHADY ISLAND ROAD I Howard Shenehon and Gerald and Mary Goodlund were present to reque~'ta two lot division. Mr. Goodlund said they are requesting a 10 foot side setback inste d of the requ~red 20 foot setback. He said this is because of the existing cabin wh ch is old and will probably eventually be torn down to make way for a new home. At t at time the 20 ::::i:e:::::O:a:fb:h:n::::::~ was closed at ,,40 P.M. I Planner Nielsen reviewed the original application where they askedlfor a three lot subdivision in 1983. He mentioned the change in the interim ordin4nce which changes the zoning from R-1 (40,000 sq. ft.), which it was in 1983, to R1-B (30,000 sq. ft.). Due to the R1-B and Shoreline District, a variance is required. I Spellman moved, Benson seconded, to recommend to Council to grant ~he simple subdivision and variance contingent upon the Planner's recommendations. I Mr. Goodlund mentioned that Planner Nielsen had told him (referred to in 4.) is not necessary as it is lakeshore. this. the reat Plannet utility easement Nielsen confirmed Mr. Shenehon said that in reading over the report he 15' street dedication and the $500 park fee and felt of. I strenuouslylobjected to the he was bein~ taken advantage , , Commissioner Benson explained that both these items are standardlpractice. i The motion was amended to exclude "and rear" from Planning recommetdation #4. carried unanimously by roll call vote (Reese was not present). I Motion . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, OCTOBER 1, 1985 page two PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT - E.G. ROSENTHAL - 5405 ST. LBANS BAY ROAD Mr. E.G. Rosenthal and his architect Mr. Dick Larson were present. Mr. L.arson complimented Planner Nielsen on the thoroughness of his~'repor.t. He saa.d they are proposing a small condominium office project on two lots. They feel that the property is better suited to something like this because of th proximity of Highway 7. He said office buildings make excellent neighbors with 8:00-5:00 hours and very little, if any, business on weekends. He referred to the !Comprehensive Plan regarding buffer zones. They share Planner Nielsen's concernabou~ how to handle traffic and felt that the intersection proposed in connection withlWaterford should become a full intersection. He suggested that they work with the ~ighway Department and the proposed commercial on the other side of Highway 7. They qon't feel their proposal would have any affect on the area. He said Mr. Rosenthal 'is the owner, not a developer of the property. They would like input from the neigh ors. Commissioner Watten said he feels this is better than straight co ercial, it forms a good buffer and would recommend it. Chair Leslie asked if a market study had been done. j are proposing something that WOUld1e developed in sure how much would be built at one time, it would finances. possibly 1/2 to 1/3 at a ime. i David Theide, a neighbor located at 20145 Excelsior Boulevard aske1 about the size of the buildings. i Mr. Larson said not yet. They a pia.ad manner. They are not depend on the market study and Mr. Larson said they will be two story wooden structures between them and the residential area. He also said due structures will be about 20' lower than the homes to the with berm~ng and landscaping to the to~ography the proposed north. ! Commissioner Schultz asked why this area is not zoned commercial ~n the present plan? i I Planner Nielsen said the City didn't want more commercial. He als~ mentioned the R-C zoning requires a C.U.P. and that there is a 2~ story limit. ! Chair Leslie asked about water. Mr. Larson said they wish Shorewood would probably end up with a well. He said the fite protection or a sprinkler system. I provide them with water, Ibut they will units will be built so t~ey don't require i i Commissioner Spellman asked Planner Nielsen if it could be handled 'through a P.U.D. Planner Nielsen said commercial isn't covered under P.U.D. 's at this time. ~:~~:~~ :~r~~:'p~~;:~~~.at 20185 Excelsior Boulevard asked if th~rel Is any desigh8ted i . Planner Nielsen said possibly a small area. He will look into it. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, OCTOBER 1, 1985 page three Commissioner Schultz asked about the "panhandle" to the north. , I Mr. Larson said they were considering dividing them into two lots,] the existing houses on them. They have to study this further. I I Pat Theide, David's wife, asked if there would pe trash containersl behind the buildings. and possibly relocating or blacktopping Mr. Larson said nothing would be there except berming and landscaPling. I I Pat also said she would be reallt concerned if there is and Excelsjior Boulevard and no Highway 7 access. , eccess Mr. Larson said they do not plan an access onto Excelsior Boulevarr. , they want access/ egress to Highway 7. Dennis Martin, Barb's husband, said that during the Trivesco discu sion, the neighbors had been told there would not be any commercial development north f Highway 7. Mr. Larson showed concern over how to work with the traffic Planner Nielsen explained the Corridor Study and said it would pro ably be a year before they know anything regarding the intersection. Pat Theide said they have enough trouble with noise now and she definately does not want to see any kind of a traffic signal there. Spellman move, Benson seconded to recommend to Council that theYtke a change in the status of the property. Motion denied by roll call vote - Spellman-aye - Leslie, Benson, Watten, Schultz and Mason-nay. 1 Chair Leslie said she didn't feel there was enough information to rake a decision. Commissioner Benson said he would like to see Mr. Larson and Mr. ~senthal meet and talk with the neighbors. ! I I Mr. Larson said they will set up meetings with the neighbors. I MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR none REPORTS Council Liaison Stover reported on the following: Budget Well committee's ten point recommendation Christmas Lake access . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 1985 CbUNCIL CHAMBERS 51755 COUNTRY CLUB RD 7':30 P.M. M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER Chair Leslie called the meeting to order at 7:39 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Leslie; Commissioners Mason, Watten, Reese, Spel man; Council Liaison Stover; Planner Nielsen. Comm. Benson arrived t 8:53 P.M. as notified. Absent: Schultz (excused) APPROVAL OF MINUTES Spellman moved, seconded by Watten to approve the minutes of Octob'er as written. Motion carried unanimously. 7:30 PM PUBLIC HEARING - SIMPLE SUBDIVISION AND LOT WIDTH VARIANCE PAUL AUBRECHT AND ROBERT SIEGEL - 20555 and 20575 RADISSON ROAD i 1, 1985 Mr. Paul Aubrecht was present to explain the reasons for this req proposes to convey approximately a 1,665 square foot triangle fro Dr. Siegel. This would bring Dr. Siegel's lot more in conformanc requirements. Mr. Aubrecht his lot to with lot width Spellman moved, seconded by Watten, to recommend approval of ment to the Council subject to the Planner's recommendations rearrange- Public portion of the Public Hearing was closed at 7 :43 PM withoucomment. 1. The applicants must record the division and combination with ~ennepin County within 30 days of their receipt of the Council resolution app~oving the request. Mr. Aubrecht must submit a title opinion for his property to lhe City Attorney for his review and approval. I 2. Motion passed unanimously. 7:45 PM PUBLIC HEARING - SETBACK VARIANCE AND VARIANCE TO EXPAND STRUCTURE JIM WINSTEAD FOR BURGER KING - 19425 STATE HIGHWAY 7 NONCONFORMING Mr. Jim Winstead presented his proposal to add onto his existing urger King restaurant. He would like to add a 8' X 20' "solarium" type seat"ng area onto the northeast corner of the building which would expand the total sea ing capacity to 110. Most of the interior space of the addition would be taken up by a fireplace. He also proposes to relocate an 8' X 18' walk-in cooler from inside he building to the outside west wall. The resulting space inside would accommod te room for an employee break room. Mr. Winstead said he plans to put a brick I yer outside the aluminum exterior wall of the cooler. . . . Burger King Variance, continued: PLANNING ~OMMISSION MEETING :1' NOVEMBER 19, 1985 page two without colent. Public portion of the Public Hearing closed at 7:48 PM Chair Leslie asked Planner Nielsen to clarify what the existing nfconformities are, besides the signage. Planner Nielsen explained that the building does not conform to current setback requirements on the north and east. The new 0 dinance requires a 30 foot open space between street and building. , Spellman moved, seconded by Watten to recommend to Council that tle request for the variance be denied. Reese felt he needed a stronger reason to deny the request since the proposed changes would improve the appearance of the building. Commission members also felt they needed to see parking plans for review. It was also noted that silgnage is currently exceeded by 84 square feet. The Commission asked Mr. Winstead if ,these improvements were being proposed to satisfy the corporate image. He replied t~at he had two reasons; to remain competitive as well as to satisfy corporate im ge. Commissioner Watten was concerned with the fact that there was controversy wit the neighbors to allow the restaurant to be built in the first place, the size ~f the building is crowding, the parking requirements need to be explained, and this sets a precedence for other nonconforming commercial structures. Chair Leslie agre d that she is concerned about setting precedence, but the fact that the improve ents would enhance the property caused mixed emotions. Mr. Winstead said he would b~ willing to modify the plans of the solarium so that it would not extend out !beyond the face of the building as much, if this were possible. , Motion to deny the request for variance failed by Roll Call Vote and Spellman - aye). 3 nays (Watten Chair Leslie clarified that the reason for her nay vote was that he felt she needed the information on parking requirements. Reese moved, seconded by Mason to recommend approval of the varia1ce Council subject to the following recommendations: 1. That the addition to the east side not extend beyond the pres~nt building. request to face of the 2. That the addition to the west side be covered with brick, present building. I 1 theJsame as the req irements. 3. That the signage be brought into conformance with current 4. Establish a staff review of parking requirements for Council eview. And that the motion is contingent upon the requirement that parking sp ce be adequate for the number of seats available within the restaurant plus he number of staff working there. Motion to recommend approval to Council, based upon the above rec mmendations, passed by Roll Call Vote - 3 ayes (Watten and Spellman - nay). . . . , PLANNING FOMMISSION MEETING , NOVEMBER 19, 1985 page three 8:00 PM PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT MICHAEL SPEAR - 22570 MURRAY STREET Mr. Spear explained that he proposes to build a 14 X26 foot addition onto his existing garage which is currently 760.5 square feet. This would result in 1,128 square foot total which exceeds the 1,000 square foot limit on accessory buildings according to the new Ordinance. He said the main reason for the aldditional space is intended for storage of one vehicle and a work bench. . Commission acknowledged a letter of opposition from neighbor Daniell C. Phillips of 22630 Murray Street. Public portion of the Public Hearing closed at 8:15 PM. Spellman moved, seconded by Reese to recommend approval to Council! subject to zoning requirements in reference to home occupations. Motion car~ied unanimously by Roll Call Vote. 1 8:15 PM PUBLIC HEARING - SETBACK VARIANCE LANDFORM, INC. - 5900 BOULDER BRIDGE LANE Mr. Tom Wartman of Landform, Inc. was present to request a 20 foo~ rear yard setback to build an enclosed swimming pool. It was noted that the front ~ard of this property maintains a 50 foot setback where there is only a 35 foo setback requirement because it is located on a corner lot, therefore giving more open pace in front. Public portion of the Public Hearing closed at 8:21 PM without cOiment. Spellman moved, seconded by Watten to recommend to Council approv~l of the setback variance subject to recommendations by the CitY...Planner which .includes amending the Development Agreement to reflect a reduction in the rear yard set ack for Lot 18 and increasing its front yard setback to 50 feet. Motion passed unanimously. I SIMPLE SUBDIVISION Meridian Construction Co. - 6065 Lake Linden Drive Mr. Court MacFarlane, representing Meridian Construction Co. and ~arOld Johnsen, was present to answer any questions. Meridian Construction propo es to build a "zero lot line" two-family dwelling on Mr. Johnsen's property at 065 Lake Linden Dr. Planner Nielsen reported that City Attorney Froberg does not appr paragraph No.9 of the Declaration and Covenant Establishing Party Wall. H the Attorney's recommendation in reference to paragraph No. 9 reads u event of damage or destruction to one of the duplex units, the party owning the d maged portion' should be required to adequately repair or replace the party's po tion and restore it to its original condition". And there also should be some pro ision for Fire and Casualty Insurance. . . . Simple Subdivision, Meridian Const., continued: PLANNING rOMMISSION MEETING NOVEMBER 19, 1985 page four I Spellman moved, seconded by Watten, to recommend to Council approvfl of the simple subdivision subject to recommendations by the City Attorney and provisions by the City Planner as follows: 1. Satisfactory review and approval of the proposed maintenance igreement by the City Attorney. , 2. Fencing should be addressed in the maintenance agreement. 3. The applicant should submit new legal descriptions for the tw~. unit lots. These will be needed..in order to draft the Council resolution necessary for recording the division. 4. Prior to receiving the Council resolution a park dedication f,e must be paid for one unit ($500). Credit has been given for the other uni for the fee paid when the property was divided in 1983. The applicant must submit a title opinion to the City Attorne~ for his review and approval. I 5. Motion carried unanimously. INFORMAL DISCUSSION - NEAR MOUNTAIN P.U.D. Mr. Peter Pflaum presented a revised preliminary plat to the Commtssion which eliminates the quadraminiums and increases the .number oftownhous~s from 120 to 160 total. Also proposed is a redistribution of the living units and improvement of the traffic circulation. He said the Park Commission would like to s e Near Mountain parkland combined with parkland on the Bruce property. Near Mounaindevelopment is forming a protective covenant with the neighbors on Ridge Road wh'ch agrees to treat the shoreline of Silver Lake the same as they do, allowing no mot rized vehicles. Construction will phase from the north end of the project to the outh and then spread over toward Silver Lake. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR None. I I Council Liaison Stover reported to the Commission that they will Be review the City's Dog Ordinance. : ! REPORTS requested to An update of the Vine Hill Road/Highway 7 intersection was review The City is purchasing the Murfin property, located north of the and some old oil tanks buried there are to be removed by Murfin a Purchase Agreement. ublic Works garage part of the . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING NOVEMBER 19, 1985 page five Reports, continued: Shorewood Oaks and Boulder Bridge developments are working out details to have a water line extension from Boulder Bridge to service Shorewood Oaks. The recent publication in the South Shore Weekly Newspaper that the City is to develop its own Police Department was a result of a simple sug~estion and current status is that of discussion purpose only. I Respectfully submitted, IP .M. I I I Motion Patricia Helgesen planning its . . . ;1> ,j /!/{. v , '0 Ifrf'J-- 11/ c- IktLr / n.y LEGAL NOTICE PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF SHOREWOOD A.J-b NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the Citt of Shorewood will hold a Public Hearing in the Council Chambers of the Shorewood City Hall, 5755 Country Club Road, Shorewood, Minnes~ta, on Tuesday, 19 November, 1985 at 8:00 PM, or as soon thereafter as possible. The purpose of the Hearing is to consider a requestlby Michael Spear for a conditional use permit to increase his gar~ge i space to exceed 1,000 square feet on property located at 225701 Murray Street, said property described as: "That part of Lot 85, Auditor's Subdivision Number 135, Hennr' pin County, Minnesota, described as beginning at the southwest corner of said Lot 85; thence east along the south line of said Lot 85 to a, point 473.50 feet west from the southeast corner of Lot 84 in saidlAuditor's Subdivision; thence northerly, deflecting to the left 89 deg~ees 15' 19" a distance of 345.53 feet; thence northerly, deflecting to t~e left o degrees 29' 17" a distance of 319.50 feet more or less to ~he shoreline of Galpin Lake; thence westerly along said shoreline to the fest line of said Lot 85; thence south along said west line to the point of beginning.", P.I.N. No. 34-117-23-44-0041 Oral and written comments will be considered at that time. City of Shorewood SANDRA KENNELLY City Clerk ~( r- 01 I ~ r L t fv-- ( To be published 8 November 1985. ?~('t() (\A, I J/~ J/. / fJu .6L; / tj8S- #Ef11(IM'G- . September Sandra Kenn~lly City Clerk City of Shorewood Excelsior, ,Mn. 55331 Dear Ms. Kennelly; I am writing on ,behalf of my father, Dan. C.Ph llips, whO. owns property at' 22630 Murray Street. He is 91 years of age and unable t,o"respond personally. I have power ofattorn~y over his affairs. I write to you relative to the request of Kieha lS~arr, 22570 Murray, Street, for a conditional use pet it to 1n- cr.ease his garage Space to exceed 1,000 square eet. It is difficult to respond objectively without intended use, ()f the garage. If it is for stori vehicles::; or is to be used for SOme other comme granting of the request does not seem to be in interest of a residential neighborhood. owing the g commercial ci8.1 venture, he best ". Even if,the" current owner were not to use the. f cilj..tX c~.. mercially, it could be an attractivecommerc,1.al fa.~iU.t1 for a future QWllerc and become a potential problemf r~ig~. 'as well' as'the village. I would urge you not to grant the conditional u e for ~~~b a pernament structure of the size proposed. I am sorry tha.t aprev.1ous obligation prevents attending the hearing in person. ....; Yours very f/9ff' .. hitt~ hillips //)J~ Warren E. Daniel C. . . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, DECEMBE~ 3, 1985 GOUNCIL CHAMBERS 755 COUNTRY CLUB RD :30 P.M. M I NUT E S CALL TO ORDER Chair Leslie called the meeting to order at 7:39 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Leslie; Commissioners Mason, Schultz, Reese, 7:51 PM); Council Liaison Stover; Planner Nielsen; Benson (arrived P11n. Asst~ Helgesen. Absent: Commissioners Watten and Spellman. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Reese moved, seconded by Mason to approve the minutes of November 19, 1985 as written. Motion carried unanimously. 7:30 PM PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 1 E.G. Rosenthal - 20095 Excelsior Blvd. and 5405 & 5385 St. Alban'j Bay Road Mr. Richard Larsen, Architect and Planner, of Wirtanen, Clark, Latsen Architects represented the applicant, Mr. E.G. Rosenthal. He is seeking approval of a land use change to allow for a two-story office building on the north $ide of Highway 7, just west of Excelsior Covenant Church property. Mr. Larsen expl~ined that the plan has been expanded since the preapplication stage and now includes 15.5 acres total. The property is currently zoned R-2A which would allow single~rtdltwo-family residential. The applicant is requesting a rezoning to R-C, Resi~ential-Commercial. Mr. Larsen feels that the proposed use would be quite compatible ~ith the existing residential neighborhood for the following reasons: the main usagt' would consist of daytime only; weekday only; will create a noise barrier from t e highway; all parking would be in front (south side); all lighting would be con ained in front and low-level; traffic would access directly to Highway 7 via a p oposed intersection. According to his sources, Mr. Larsen said it is estimated that anloffite building of this size would use about 4 - 5 thousand gallons of water per ~ay. He said that an estimate of this amount could easily be provided by privaie wells. In response to the recommendation in the Planner's Report, Mr. La1sen said that they do not want to wait for the Corridor Study to be completed before the land use change. As a matter of fact, he feels they would have a better c ance with the Highway Dept. approving an intersection if they already had the l~nd use change approval, and the project would he contin,gent upon approval of tht intersection. Chair Leslie invited the public to present their comments: I Ken Vogel, 19795 Excelsior Blvd., said his main concern is inCreajed traffic in front of his residence which is east of the project, and that the drainage may run off onto his lower-lying property. Mr. Larsen replied that Sincet'their project is contingent upon approval of a full-service intersection, all traf ic would access directly on and off of the highway. As far as drainage is concer ed, the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District requires that the proje,ct would not be a lowed to increase the rate of run-off without being abte to absorb it. I I I . . . Planning Commission Meeting Tuesday, December 3, 1985 page two Penny Vogel, 19795 Excelsior Blvd., is also concerned about traffic. She said she believes the developer would like to pressure the Highway Dept. into granting the intersection by gaining approval of the project first. Also she s concerned about run-off from the parking lot polluting Footprint Lake. Mr. Larse replied that as far as traffic goes, if this area were to be developed as residen ial, without an intersection, there would be almost as much traffic generated as pposed to traffic generated by an office building. In response to pollution of Foo print Lake, Mr. Larsen said the Watershed District requires that they build a holding pond with an outlet that traps any petroleum or other products floatin in the water. Bob Reutiman, .5915 Galpin Lake Rd., doesn't like "spot zoning" in I the middle of a residential area, and concerned about the drainage pattern. He d~esn't believe an of fi ce bui ld..ing :~~:d geoe. ra te the same or Ie s s traff ic as res i de1t ial. Walter Bean; 5285 St. Alban'.s Bay Rd., asked of the Commission: I What is the Commission's posture in respect to "spot zoning"? Pla.nner Nielsen replied that"the Comprehensive Plan discourag.. es I uncoordi. nated sp@t zoning, although, an R-C District to some degree is intend1d to be a spot zone. - What criteria do the Commission and Council apply to consideratlon of the need for commercial use in what is basically a ?ingle-family residential area? Chair Leslie explained that market studies are done and submitt,d to the Commission in order to assess the needs of .a community. I Peter Boyer, 19685 Excelsior Blvd., reminded the Commission that ~is neighborhood was given assurance at the Trivesco public hearing that no commerfial development would be allowed on the north side of Highway 7. He does ~t wantlmore intense zoning than already exists. He feels the noise factor and parking congestion problems would worsen; the project would lower property values; and signag, would become a nuisance. He feels this particular project would be a good idea tf it were located in an appropriate commercial zoning. Vla11ahe Wierson, 19765 Excelsior Blvd., reaffirmed the point made I at the Trivesco public hearing that no commercial development would occur on the *orth of Highway 7. Dorothy Wellens, 19550 Excelsior Blvd., feels the developer ShOUlf consider dividing this property for residential lots. Mr. Larsen replied that is i doubtful anyone would pay a reasonable price ($25~35,000) for a lot in this locat on. Chuck Rosenberger, 19780 Excelsior Blvd., Deephaven, believes tra fic pattern would result in increased traffic on Hooper Lake Road. . I Bonnie Workman, 19610 Excelsior Blvd., Deephaven, urges Shorewood1to coordinate its planning more closely with Deephaven, which has maintained a high quality residential neighborhood with safe streets. David Thiede, 20145 Excelsior Blvd., wanted to know if this projeft would depreciate his property values and who will pay for the loss. Barbara Martin, 20185 Excelsior Blvd., feels the wayside rest is fnough of a buffer from the highway noise. Afraid that a change in zoning toward co~! ercial won't stpp at R-C, and they will end up wrth something like MacDonald's next Also believes the water usage and run-off estimates are not accurate according 0 what she claims the DNR wi 11 say. . Dennis Martin, 20185 Excelsior Blvd., agrees that the wayside rest is enough of a buffer. He said two different real estate agents told him the pr ject would cause a 25% loss in property value to his and his neighbor's property, ith a 10% loss for the property across the street. Planning Commission Meeting Tuesday, December 3, 1985 page three . . Chair Leslie asked for clarification on the drainage plan from Trtvesco to the north. Planner Nielsen said there is an existing culvert which would alltw some flow to the north side of Highway 7. I .. .-t.".._, Chair Leslie asked Mr. Larsen do not anticipate any problem growth in Shorewood. He said affirm a need. about the marketability of the prOPfsal. He said they in renting the office space cons ide ing the rate of that if a market study were done he is sure it would Planner Nielsen added that there was a slight discrepancy in the $taff report in that it omitted the fact that the subdivision of the Roddy property wa$ never recorded and is therefore void. Mr. Rosenthal said he has an option on thts lot and is considering including it in the project site for use as additionat buffer to the west. Comm. Schultz commented that he gives substantial consideration t~ the fact that this neighborhood was given assurance of no further commercial detelopment in this area, and on the basis of this assurance, moved to deny recommend~tion to Council, I seconded by Reese. Motion to deny recommendation passed unanimoufly by Roll Call Vote - 5 ayes. . 8:00 PM PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Delbert Hennessey - 6035 Seamans Drive . Mr. Hennessey was present to request a C.U.P. to build a 22' x 22' detached garage for use as storage for garden/lawn equipment. He currently has a! 24' x 26' attached garage, creating a total area of accessory buildings of 1,108 squfre feet. His proposal has been reduced in size from that of his initial applicttion to build a storage space for his motor home. , . . . Planning Commission Meeting Tuesday, December 3, 1985 page four Public portion of the public hearing closed at 9:26 PM without co~ent. ! Comm. Schultz asked what he would do without this building. Mr. ~ennessey replied that much of his garden equipment would have to be stored outside las it currently is. Schultz clarified with the applicant that none of this equiP1ent is to be used in conjunction with his business. ! Reese moved, seconded by Benson to recommend to Council approval if the C.U.P. Chair Leslie suggested that the Zoning Ordinance in reference to ~ome occupation regulation be considered. Reese amended his motion to recommend 1Pproval dependent upon inclusion of zoning regulations pertaining to home occupatio~. Benson seconded. Motion passed unanimously. ! i 8:30 PM PUBLIC HEARING - REVISION OF PRELIMINARY PLAT (NEAR MOUNT IN) Lundgren Bros. Const. - So. of Covington Rd between Silver Lake a d Vine Hill Rd. . I Peter Pflaum and Rick Sathre made a slide presentation of the pro~ect site, as well as an aerial view showing the outlining boundaries. ! Mr. Pflaum reported that he has met with Christmas Lake, Minneton*a, and Chanhassen neighbors over the last two weeks, and based upon these meetings ~ave made some modifications in the plan. They have created additional buffer t~ Chanhassen boundary, and moved the traffic access point on Vine Hill Road toialign with property line across the street. No changes in density were made. ' A Minnetonka neighbor on Vine Hill Road and Manchester wanted to ~now who is going to maintain the ponds across from his house. Mr. Pflaum explaine<jl that they, as the developer, plan to retain art easement in order to take care of th, ponds in case the individual homeowner does not. In other areas of the project such as the townhouse clusters, there will be a Homeowner's Association to ta e over property maintenance. Mr. Pflaum said there are no improvements planned t Vine Hill Road as part of the development, this would be up to the City. In respon e to a question regarding run-off to the east of Vine Hill Road , Mr. Sathre expl ined that stOrm sewer plans have the drainage to the west and would regulate the evel of the ponds along the east (Vine Hill Rd) border of the project. Public portion of the public hearing closed at 10:03 PM. ~Mr. Pflaum reviewed the Park Commission recommendations for parklfnd to contain lake access, allowing no motorized vehicles. One approach would be to trade some property with Bruce Construction Co. to provide parkland at the north end f Silver Lake, although they do not know to date if Mr. Bruce would approve of t is. The other approach would be to acquire a small piece of land from the Bruce property more to the east, of which Mr. Bruce does approve. Planner Nielsen suggested that any recommendation for approval be subject to the following: ! , - That there be an understanding that Lots 1 - 4, Block 8 may betubject depending on the Bruce Bros. and their willingness to trade som land. consideration should be given to the possibility of singular actess for perhaps in the form of a small cul-de-sac so as to eliminate th~ direct Covington Road. to change Also some lots 1 - 3, access onto . . . Planning Commission Meeting Tuesday, December 3, 1985 page five Recommendations, continued: - The platting of the northerly townhouses be subject to change dipending on specific site plan approval. I The south townhouses be platted as out lots since the design of 4hese townhouses are not complete at this point. I Easements to the ponding areas be provided to the City because ~hese ponding areas will take run-off from the streets. I - Provide drainage and utility easements around all lots. The preliminary plat be subject to Watershed District and DNR awproval and any conditions they set forth. - As part of the development stage, the developer must submit a s,tback map. Adjustments may be made to the plat depending upon the resultin, building pads. The plat will be adjusted slightly on the south and west to address Minnetonka and Chanhassen concerns. . - That any approval. is for the preliminary plat only and the remafnder of develop- ment stage approval will be discussed at the January meeting (a chitectural plans for townhouses, landscaping, grading plans, etc.). , - Building setbacks will be subject to further discussion. i Benson moved, seconded by Reese, to recommend to Council approvaliof the revised preliminary plat subject to the City Engineer's recommendations, nd the recommenda- tions provided by the City Planner as outlined above. Motion pas!ed unanimously. INFORMAL DISCUSSION - PREAPPLICATION FOR PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE P AN AMENDMENT Heritage Residence- 6155 Riviera Lane I Mr. Gorecki, representing First American Care Facilities, Inc., presented the preapplication of a 73 unit elderly housing facility proposed to re built qn approximately 4.8 acr.e.s of land located on th. e east side of Rivie a Lane, just north of Highway 7. The proposed density of 14 units per acre exceeds he maximum density (six unit per acre) allowed by the Comprehensive Plan. . Planner Nielsen described for the Commission how his recommendatitns would include relocating the access to the south, thereby maintaining buildabil ty of the Reutiman lots. This access would also provide a better driveway site for the Sullivan Center and the Reutiman lots as well, instead of further access points 0 Lake Linden Dr. Jerry Mundt, of the architectural firm Jafvert, Mueller and Mundt, as ured the Commission of the high quality, residential character of the building. He s~id one of their considerations was to have the access off of Riviera Lane. In ref' ard to the density, Mr. Mundt said perhaps a P.U.D. would assure the particular use f r the land. He said that studies show parking needs to be very minimal for elder y housing. For financing reasons, the project would need municipal water, ant the feasibility of providing water needs to be worked out. One possibility would be to extend water not only to the project site, but extend south to the Sullivan Ce ter and Shorewood Shopping Center as well. . . . Planning Commission Meeting Tuesday, December 3, 1985 page six In response to a question by Comm. Schultz regarding on-site supetv~s~on, Mr. Mundt said there would be one caretaker residing at the facility and an emergency call system would be provided in each dwelling for direct communicatio~ to the caretaker. Also, a high-standard security system installed. There will be ~itchenettes in each dwelling, and a central community activity room. . There has been no market study documented, although informal rese*rch shows a strong need for elderly housing. Mr. Gorecki said there is a long waiti$g list for occupancy at the Excelsior Senior Center which is a subsidized fa~ility. This proposed facility would not be subsidized because this type of mo*ey is no longer available from the government, therefore, Heritage Residence woulf be private finance~ Mr. Gorecki said he would appreciate any direction the Commissionlwished to provide. Commission members suggested maintaining access to the south and fast toward the shopping area. Planner Nielsen said the City should recognize that the impact of I a II owing this density for elderly housing would not be the same as density of other forms of multiple housing. He also said that the consideration of extendi g water beyond the project site is worth pursuing, although he is not sure at wh se expense. Commission members said they thought the proposal was a good ideal and encouraged developer to work out the access and water issues. the MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR None REPORTS None ADJOURNMENT Benson moved, seconded by Schultz, to adjourn the meeting at 11:3 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. Chair Leslie announced that the next scheduled Planning Commissio meeting is on Tuesday, January 7, 1986. Respectfully submitted, Patricia Helgesen