Loading...
2005 planning minutes . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, JANUARY 4, 2005 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chair Bailey called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Bailey; Commissioners Gagne, Gniffke, Conley, Meyer, Packard, and White; and Planning Director Nielsen Absent: None APPROVAL OF MINUTES · December 7, 2004 Gagne moved, Packard seconded, Approving the December 7, 2004, Planning Minutes as presented. Motion passed 7/0. 1. 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - C.U.P. FOR ACCESSORY SPACE OVER 1200 SO. FT. Applicant: Tom and Tina Verburgt Location: 5310 Elmridge Circle Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 7:02 P.M., noting the procedures to be utilized in a Public Hearing. Director Nielsen explained the history of the case, noting Sharratt Design, representing Tom and Tina Verburgt, was in the process of remodeling the home on the property located at 5310 Elmridge Circle. Part of the remodeling project included the addition of a new attached garage on the southeast comer of the house. The garage was designed with a storage area adjoining the garage that would technically be counted as part of the dwelling. Since the owner had decided to make this space part of the garage, and since the area of this space, added to the garage, exceeded 1200 square feet, the change required a conditional use permit pursuant to Section 1201.03 Subd. 2.d.( 4) of the Shorewood Zoning Code. Director Nielsen went on to explain the property was zoned R-1AlS, Single-Family ResidentiallShoreland and contained approximately 57,350 square feet in area. The garage was angled to conform to the shape of the lot, currently contained 1200 square feet of area, and would be 1325 square feet of area with the proposed change. The proposed home contained 2208 square feet on the main level alone, with even more space on the second level. With regard to analysis of the case, Director Nielsen stated the request complied with all criteria for a conditional use permit. He noted the heavy vegetation on the site, thus, there was not a need for additional landscaping. K. Brian Nowak, architect for the Verburgt's, stated he was in agreement with the information presented by Director Nielsen and would be happy to answer any further questions the Commission had of him. Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:06 P.M. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES January 4, 2005 Page 2 of2 With the exception of clarification of an item, the Commission had no further questions related to the case. Conley moved, Gniffke seconded, Approving a Conditional Use Permit for Accessory Space Over 1200 Square Feet of Area for Tom and Tina Verburgt, 5310 Elmridge Circle. Motion passed 7/0. Director Nielsen stated this matter would be placed on the January 24, 2005, Regular City Council Meeting Agenda. 2. DISCUSS 2005 WORK PROGRAM Director Nielsen provided a preliminary draft of the 2005 Planning Commission Work Program to the Planning Commission. He then reviewed all the items on it on a monthly basis for the Commission. A brief discussion on side yard setbacks, affordable housing issues, and redevelopment trends within the City was held by the Commission. Chair Bailey thanked Director Nielsen for preparation of the draft Work Program, and stated any additional items could be added upon request. The Commission also agreed the next meeting of the Planning Commission would be held in February, 2005. 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. 4. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen stated a request for a Conditional Use Permit, and Ordinance Amendment, as well as a Continuation of a Public Hearing on a Request for a Conditional Use Permit for Fill over 100 Cubic Yards, would be part of the February 1,2005, Planning Commission Meeting Agenda. 5. REPORTS · Liaison to Council Commissioner Gagne reported on matters considered and actions taken at the December 13, 2004, Regular City Council Meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). · SLUC No report given. · Other No report given. 6. ADJOURNMENT Packard moved, Gagne seconded, Adjourning the January 4, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting at 7:58 P.M. Motion passed 7/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. Sally Keefe, Recording Secretary . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, 1 FEBRUARY 2005 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chair Bailey called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Bailey; Commissioners Gagne, Gniffke, Conley, Meyer, Packard, and White; and Planning Director Nielsen Absent: Council Liaison Callies APPROVAL OF MINUTES · 4 January 2005 Gagne moved, Meyer seconded, Approving the January 4, 2005, Planning Meeting Minutes as amended, by adding "Conley" to the Roll Call as Present. Motion passed 7/0. 1. 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - C.U.P. AMENDMENT FOR BUILDINGS AT THE CEMETERY OF THE RESURRECTION Applicant: St. John the Baptist Church Location: 5555 Covington Road Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 7:03 P.M., noting the procedures utilized in a Public Hearing. He also noted matters recommended for approval this evening would be placed on the February 28, 2005, Regular City Council Meeting Agenda. Director Nielsen explained the history of this case, noting in January of 2003, St. John the Baptist Church received a conditional use permit approving a master plan for the future development of the Cemetery of the Resurrection, located at 5425 Covington Road. The master plan for this project included plans for two mausoleum structures to be built at some time in the future. The resolution approving the conditional use permit provided that church representatives would apply for an amendment to the c.u.P. at such time as the buildings were to be built and when more specific plans were available. St. John representatives had recently submitted plans for the first of the two buildings. The site plan for the cemetery had been revised to show a different location for the building in question from the original master plan for the project. The building was now proposed as being located further north on the site on the east side of the entry road coming into the property. The applicant also proposed demolishing the existing garage structure in that location and locating a new one further north on the site on the west side of the looped drive. Director Nielsen then reviewed a larger site plan for the mausoleum structure. The proposed building would be one story in height, and measured approximately 41' x 69'. Two-thirds of the structure would be 15 feet tall, with the center third of the building peaking at 30 feet. Construction materials would consist of granite and glass with a standing seam metal roof. He also noted the building would provide space for 364 crypts and 300 cremation niches. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES February 1, 2005 Page 2 of7 . In addition, Director Nielsen explained, the existing maintenance building for the cemetery would be removed and a new maintenance building would be located just west of the northwest corner of the loop drive. Plans for this structure had not yet been provided, however, church representatives described it as a typical two-car (24' x 24') garage building with a gable roof and siding, earth tone in color, so as to blend into the site. The proposed mausoleum structure was quite consistent with the concept plans submitted as part of the previous Cu.P. By relocating it from its original proposed location, the applicants would avoid a considerable amount of site alteration. In addition, the structure was tucked down into the site and further from adjoining residential properties. Director Nielsen noted that at one story and just over 2800 square feet, its size was that of a relatively modest home in Shorewood. A circular terrace would also be located immediately to the south of the proposed building. Landscaping was considered somewhat incomplete in the plans. However, given the location of the building within the site, screening or buffering from nearby residential properties was not considered to be an issue. Director Nielsen stated the landscaping would presumably compliment the quality and dignity of the proposed building. . With regard to the maintenance building, and its somewhat larger size, it was considered an improvement over the current building. Director Nielsen explained the proposed location demonstrated in the application showed the building being located too close to the northerly property line. Since the land to the north was public right-of-way, a 50-foot setback was required. St. John representatives had indicated that an application for a variance for this structure to be located closer to the north line might be necessary . Director Nielsen stated Staff recommended the amendment to the St. John conditional use permit be approved subject to the proposed maintenance building being located in compliance with current zoning standards. Deacon Gary Hoffman, of St. John the Baptist Church, clarified several items related to the application, such as the color scheme for the proposed mausoleum. He explained the front and back of the proposed structure would be identical since the back of the building would be the first thing people would see upon entering the cemetery roadway. He also noted there were be sandblasted sculptures in the upper exterior niches. Deacon Hoffman also explained the proposed size of the building revolved around the size of the chapel within the building. Plans included a chapel that would allow for approximately 200 people standing for a brief memorial service for the deceased. He noted there would also be a children's memorial area near the mausoleum with approximately 100 in ground memorial sites. This area would also include walking paths to allow a relaxing atmosphere near that area. He also stated there were no trees of concern being removed as part of this proj ect. Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:15 P.M. Commissioner Gagne clarified the size of the proposed mausoleum and questioned the lack of bathroom facilities in the mausoleum plan. Deacon Hoffman stated it would be very cost prohibitive to include sewer and water to that area of the cemetery. . Deacon Hoffman explained, in response to Commissioner White's question, that mechanicals would include heating and air conditioning as well as appropriate mausoleum venting. He also noted there would be one additional level of crypts on the eastern end of the building. Also, the inside of the chapel would be mostly granite with beam structures internally. He noted these plans reflected some of the design elements utilized in the church and would be carried through to the proposed mausoleum building. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES February 1, 2005 Page 3 of7 . He also explained, in response to Chair Bailey's question, no landscape lighting would be placed near the mausoleum. The only lighting near the structure would be security system lighting, and also the current street light would remain in its current location. Commissioner Gagne questioned the time line of the proposed project. Deacon Hoffman stated the building construction would most likely begin in early summer with nearly total completion of the structure in the fall. He noted mausoleums were typically built offsite and shipped to the site for completion. In addition, Deacon Hoffman stated soil borings would be taken, fill placed as needed, and then construction would take place. He also noted the roof of the mausoleum would be granite also, except for the peak. Commissioner Gagne questioned the age of the cemetery. Deacon Hoffman explained the land for the cemetery had beenpurchased in 1916, and consecrated for all near that time. He stated a priest had donated all of the land, and stipulated it was to include deceased of varying religions. Director Nielsen questioned the lighting included as part of the security system. Deacon Hoffman explained there would be lights at the entryway and a bit of low level lighting at night to be able to see through the chapel area. He also noted various administrators would be allowed access through a restricted security card system. White moved, Gagne seconded, Recommended Approval of a Conditional Use Permit Amendment for Buildings at the Cemetery of the Resurrection, subject to Staff recommendations, for St. John the Baptist Church, 5555 Covington Road. Motion passed 7/0. . Chair Bailey closed the Public Hearing at 7:29 P.M. 2. 7:15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT REGARDING TEMPORARY SIGNAGE Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 7:30 P.M. Director Nielsen explained that the proposed zoning code text amendment related to the time frame allowed for temporary signage. He stated the proposed text was as followed: Any new business that has applied for its permanent business sign may, at the same time, apply for a temporary business sign to be displayed for no longer than 30 days, or until the permanent sign has been erected, whichever comes first. The temporary business sign shall be professionally prepared and shall be no larger than the approved permanent sign. He also noted the proposed text would apply to all business owners within the City. He has forwarded the proposed amendment to the City Attorney for review, and he requested any recommendation for approval include the stipulation that the amendment was subject to the City Attorney review and approval. Seeing no one present wishing to address this item, Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:32 P.M. . Commissioner Conley requested the words "professionally prepared" be changed to "professionally fabricated" for clarity of expectation. Commissioner White stated the proposed text required meeting the test of reasonableness and she believed it met that test. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES February 1, 2005 Page 4 of7 . Meyer moved, Packard seconded, Recommending Approval of the Proposed Zoning Code Text Amendment Regarding Temporary Signage, subject to the City Attorney review and approval, and inclusion ofthe wording "professionally fabricated". Motion passed 7/0. Chair Bailey closed the Public Hearing at 7:36 P.M. 3. 7:20 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - C.U.P. AMENDMENT FOR MULTIPLE SIGNAGE Applicant: Shorewood Village Shopping Center Location: 23470 - 23780 Highway 7 Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 7:37 P.M. Director Nielsen explained the owner of the Shorewood Village Shopping Center was remodeling some of the interior of the center, rearranging tenant spaces and creating several new, smaller shops. Part of the rearrangement included the elimination of the outdoor sales/rental area at the south end of the center, moving the hardware space to the north, and the creation of as many as six new tenant bays on the south side of the building, facing Highway 7. The result of this remodeling was that the previously approved sign plan for the center was in need of revision. He also stated representatives of the center had submitted plans showing how signs may be displayed on the building, and had also submitted revised sign criteria providing for additional, yet smaller, tenant signs, based on tenant type as outlined in the Shorewood Village Center Sign Criteria Amendment to Conditional Use Permit documentation submitted by the applicant. . Director Nielsen then reviewed the physical changes to the sign band as a result of the remodeling project. He also reviewed the difference in elevations and exposures for potential sign placement for each of the major tenants as outlined in the submitted application for amendment. He also noted the proposed sign criteria identified three different types of tenant and sign criteria for each type. In addition, there were general guidelines that applied to all tenants. It was recommended that two provisions be added to the general guidelines as shown below: "14. All signs require permits, approved by the City of Shorewood. 15. The City of Shorewood has the right to enter the property to remove unauthorized signs." He noted these were provisions that are written into the Council resolution approving the C.U.P. and were considered important for prospective tenants to be made aware of at the time of occupancy. Further, Director Nielsen state, somewhere in the sign criteria, provisions should also be included designating which of the tenants would be allowed to have signs on the freestanding pylon sign in front of the center. Director Nielsen stated, that subject to the recommendation presented, Staff recommended the C.U.P. amendment for Shorewood Village multiple signs be approved. David Schwebel, property manager for the Shorewood Village Shopping Center, stated he was in agreement with the information presented by Director Nielsen this evening, and would be happy to answer any questions the Commission may have had of him. . Seeing no one present wishing to comment on this matter, Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:44 P.M. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES February 1, 2005 Page 50f7 . In response to a question from Director Nielsen, Mr. Schwebel stated the landlord's sole discretion designated placement of tenants on the pylon sign. Commissioner Conley requested clarification on removal of signage if needed. He also suggested the words "All costs of said removal shall be borne by the property owner." be added to Item #15 of the provisions included in the general guidelines as outlined by Director Nielsen earlier in the meeting. Commissioner Gagne requested the City reexamine the driveway ingress and egress in front of the Cub Foods Store as it was sometimes difficult to avoid eastbound traffic from Lake Linden Drive coming abruptly around the curve in that area. Discussion among the Commission ensued regarding clarification of exposures and elevations for the general guidelines as outlined on page E-3 and E-5 of the Amendment to the Shorewood Sign Criteria as proposed by the applicant. The following suggestions for verbiage were made as part of that discussion. On page E-3, Item 3 of the General Guidelines, change the wording to read: 3. Each tenant is limited to one exterior building sign, with the exception of those Tenants which are allowed additional signs as indicated on Page E-5 of this agreement. . On page E-5, change the allocations for Fitness 19 to 50 square feet (One sign) with one sign on south elevation, and for True Value to 70 square feet (Two signs) with two signs on the west elevation, and for Corner Coffee to 40 square feet (Two signs) with one sign on the south elevation and one sign on the west elevation. Gagne moved, Gniffke seconded, Recommending Approval of the Conditional Use Permit Amendment for Multiple Signage, subject to Staff recommendations, for Shorewood Village Shopping Center, 23470 - 23780 Highway 7. Motion passed 7/0. Chair Bailey closed the Public Hearing at 8:03 P.M. 4. C.U.P. FOR FILL OVER 100 CUBIC YARDS (continued from 7 December 2004) Applicant: Martin Davis Location: 26310 Birch Bluff Road Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 8:04 P.M. and also noted this matter was a continuation of a Public Hearing held on December 7, 2004. Director Nielsen then summarized the history of the case, noting in December, 2004, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to consider a request by Martin Davis to place fill in excess of 100 cubic yards on his property at 26310 Birch Bluff Road. At that time a number of concerns were raised by Staff (see Planner's memorandum, dated 2 December 2004 and Engineer's memorandum, dated 3 December 2004). . Since that meeting, Mr. Davis' engineering consultant had submitted a letter addressing Staffs concerns and a revised grading plan. Staff had reviewed these plans and recommended approval of a conditional use permit, subject to the recommendations made in the earlier staff report and subject to the applicant making the improvements recommended by his consulting engineer. Of critical importance was the construction of the spillway from Birch Bluff Road to the southerly wetland area. This should be completed as early in the construction season as weather permitted, so as to restore drainage from the public right-of-way as soon as possible. Similar to the riprap requirement on the existing culvert on the east side of the property, riprap should be placed at the discharge end of the spillway. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES February 1, 2005 Page 6 of7 Director Nielsen further recommended that prior to commencement of any work, the applicant must provide cost estimates for the wetland restoration, the spillway construction, tree protection measures (consistent with the City's Tree Preservation Policy), and rip rapping. Prom these estimates, the c.u.P. should provide for a cash escrow or letter of credit in the amount of 150 percent of the estimate to ensure that the work would be completed by August of 2005. Director Nielson also complimented the applicant and his engineer of doing a fine job in addressing Staff concerns. Brian Dobie, applicant's engineer from Professional Engineering Consultants, Inc., stated he had visited the site on September 23, 2004, without being able to appropriately delineate the wetlands on the site due to regulations governing delineation dates. He did, however, note he believed it a good idea to include a small sand trap in the drainage spillway area to allow metals to settle out prior to entering the wetland areas on the site. He stated the applicant wanted to be a good neighbor to the City and was willing to incorporate Staff s recommendations into the proposed plans for the site. Seeing no one present wishing to address the Commission on this matter, Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 8: 14 P.M. Commissioner White questioned what the fill placed on the north side of the house would be utilized for as part of the applicant's plan for the property. Mr. Dobie explained the purpose of the fill was to create a visual image that would allow the image of the house to be softened with the perimeter of the lot. He estimated there would be approximately two to three feet of fill in certain areas on the property. He further explained the revised plan would pull the additional fill away from the mature tree area in order to better manage the majestic mature trees on the lot. Gniffke moved, Gagne seconded, Recommending Approval of the Request for Conditional Use Permit for Fill Over 100 Cubic Yards, subject to Staff Recommendations, Martin Davis, 26310 Birch Bluff Road. Motion passed 7/0. Chair Bailey closed the Public Hearing at 8: 18 P.M. 5. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR Frank and Jody Tonnemaker, 5480 Covington Road, stated they had missed the Public Hearing on Item 1 of the Agenda for this meeting, and requested clarification on certain items associated with the revised conditional use permit. Director Nielsen briefly provided a summary of the revisions for the Tonnemakers. 6. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen stated the February 15, 2005, Planning Commission Study Session Meeting Agenda would include A Discussion of Variance Criteria, Review of a Subdivision and Variance Request, and Comprehensive Plan Revisions from Met. Council. 7. REPORTS · Liaison to Council Commissioner Meyer reported on matters considered and actions taken at the January 10 and 24, 2005, Regular City Council Meetings (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES February 1, 2005 Page 7 of7 · SLUC No report was given on the Sensible Land Use Coalition meeting. · Other No other business was presented. 8. ADJOURNMENT Gagne moved, White seconded, Adjourning the February 1, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting at 8:29 P.M. Motion passed 7/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. Sally Keefe Recording Secretary . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, 15 FEBRUARY 2005 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chair Bailey called the meeting to order at 7:05 P.M. ROLLCALL Present: Chair Bailey; Commissioners Conley, Gagne, Meyer, Packard, and White; Council Liaison Callies and Planning Director Nielsen Absent: Commissioner Gniffke APPROVAL OF MINUTES . February 1, 2005 Gagne moved, Packard seconded, Approving the February 1, 2005, Planning Meeting Minutes as amended, by adding "Conley" to the Roll Call as Present, and on Page 3, Item 2, Paragraph 5, change "Seeing no present" to Seeing no one present". Motion passed 6/0. 1. DISCUSS VARIANCE CRITERIA Director Nielsen explained the history of the variance criteria for the City of Shorewood, noting that occasionally the City received a variance application that appeared to be logical, but nevertheless did not satisfy the current criteria for granting a variance. In some cases, the applicant proposed improvements that would bring the nonconformity of a property into compliance or buildings much closer to compliance with various codes that what might have presently existed on the site, however, the application did not meet the test of "hardship." To that end, the Planning Staff had suggested the possibility of modifying the criteria to allow variances in certain cases where it would be in the "public interest" to do so, where the overall result of the proposed improvements would result in substantial compliance with zoning and building codes. The Commission had agreed to consider this concept of carefully amending the zoning code and Staffhad also consulted the City Attorney on this issue. Director Nielsen then reviewed the draft amendment for the Commission as well as several past case examples where the application had not satisfied the test of hardship, but the public interest would be served in granting a variance for the applicant. Commissioner Conley questioned whether the draft amendment would allow the power of a variance to create a condition in the City whereby a resident could trade one substandard condition for another. He also questioned whether the Commission had reviewed enough of these cases to merit a change in the current ordinances or whether the amendment was needed to allow the Commission to properly discharge its duties in each case. Chair Bailey stated, of the variances reviewed in recent history, he estimated approximately 75% to 90% could be recommended for approval as a result of the draft amendment. He stated once the City allowed an element of discretion into the ordinances it seemed as though the risk of abuse of these ordinances had the potential to escalate. In addition, he was concerned about the ability to balance objectivity of the current criteria with the subjectiveness of the amendment. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES February 15, 2005 Page 2 of3 . Director Nielsen stated he strongly believed in the objectivity in the current variance criteria, however, the nature of variances made each one subjective. He noted there were several cases where an applicant had something in the application to "trade" that was typically non-conforming in nature and oftentimes was something the City would like to see changed. Commissioner Packard stated she thought the draft amendment was a bit too much like bargaining rather than meeting variance criteria, and she did not like that subjectivity being allowed into the variance process encouraged Director Nielsen to secure. Commissioner Conley stated he thought the Commission had the power to recommend what the amendment would codify, but would also add the concept of public interest to the other existing variance criteria. Chair Bailey stated he was concerned also about balancing the burdens and benefits as drafted as well as an objective definition of each one. Commissioner Meyer requested other examples of municipal codes that were similar to the one presented and review them further at a later time. Commissioner Packard agreed. Commissioner White stated she thought the more straightforward the ordinances could be made, the better the planning process worked for all parties involved. She also was interested in reviewing other municipalities' ordinances related to this topic, as she was uncertain the City needed to change the current ordinance. . Chair Bailey requested Staff obtain additional information and municipal ordinances on this topic, and also review additional cases as part of the March 2005 Study Session Meeting Agenda. The Commission agreed. 2. ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVIEW Director Nielsen explained the Planning Commission conducted an annual review of the Comprehensive Plan. He noted typically the process utilized included review of the chapter summaries with a full reading of the Chapter should any discrepancies arise. He also noted the final section of the Land Use Chapter had been completed and had received approval from the Metropolitan Council Community Development Committee. In addition, he noted several new maps would be included to reflect land use issues. Director Nielsen then reviewed the chapter summaries. Discussion ensued regarding whether the chapter summaries, as written, currently demonstrated directives or policies for the City. The Commission shared suggested revisions to the Land Use and Natural Resources summary of the Comprehensive Plan. Chair Bailey stated he thought the Commission should review the policies associated with all the chapters and if necessary, discuss whether these policies should be changed for future efforts as part of the review process. The Commission agreed. Without objection from the Commission, Chair Bailey requested the Land Use and Natural Resources summary be placed on the March 2005 Study Session meeting Agenda for additional review. 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR . There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES February 15, 2005 Page 3 of3 4. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen stated there were three public hearings related to a preliminary plat, a request for Conditional Use Permit, and a Zoning Code Amendment regarding the C-2, Auto-Oriented Zoning District, slated for the March 1,2005, Planning Commission Agenda. 5. REPORTS · Liaison to Council Commissioner Gagne reported on matters considered and actions taken at the February 14,2005, Regular City Council Meetings (as detailed in the minutes ofthat meeting). · SLUC Director Nielsen noted there was a meeting of the Sensible Lane Use Coalition slated for February 23, 2005, at the DoubleTree Park Place Hotel in St. Louis Park, Minnesota from II :30 AM to I :30 PM on the topic titled Get Your Head Out of the Sewer! That included a discussion of decentralized wastewater management and alternatives for creative sub-division planning and choices for urbanizing rural communities. · Other Chair Bailey stated, on behalf of the Commission, he wished to extend best wishes to Commissioner Packard with her future endeavors. He stated he had thoroughly enjoyed working with her as she was thoughtful, dedicated, and unflappable in her convictions and duties as a Planning Commissioner in the past years. Commissioner Packard thanked all persons present for a wonderful experience on the Planning Commission. She especially thanked Director Nielson and Chair Bailey for providing exemplary leadership in the planning process for area residents. She also encouraged more residents to become involved in the City processes and Commissions as she had enjoyed living in Shorewood for the past 25 years. She wished everyone good luck and good work in the future. 6. ADJOURNMENT Packard moved, Gagne seconded, Adjourning the February 15, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting at 9:00 P.M. Motion passed 6/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. Sally Keefe Recording Secretary . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, 1 MARCH 2005 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Acting Chair Gagne called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. Present: Chair Bailey (arrived 7:03 P.M.); Commissioners Conley, Gagne, Gniffke, Meyer, White, and Woodruff; Council Liaison Callies, and Planning Director Nielsen Absent: None APPROVAL OF MINUTES · 15 February 2005 Conley moved, White seconded, Approving the February 15, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes as amended on Page 1, Item 1, Paragraph 3, Sentence 1, change "substantial" to "substandard." Motion passed 6/0/1, with Gniffke abstaining due to absence from that meeting. 1. 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY PLAT - ARBOR CREEK Applicant: Paumen Properties, LLC Location: 5610 Grant Lorenz Road Acting Chair Gagne opened the Public Hearing, noting the procedures utilized in a Public Hearing. Chair Bailey then arrived and assumed the position of Chair for the remainder of the meeting. Director Nielsen explained that nearly one year ago, the City considered a preliminary plat for a similar project called Sleepy Hollow Woods at this same location. The original developer proposed developing approximately seven acres of land located on the west side of Grant Lorenz Road into six residential lots, one that had an existing home on it. After considerable discussion and several staff reports, that preliminary plat was approved. Since that time, the city had been notified the developer had failed to perform on the purchase agreement for the property and someone else would be taking over the project. Paumen Properties had submitted a new application for a preliminary plat. This new applicant had submitted the same plans as the previous developer, with the exception that the new plan did not include the existing owner's property. In order to increase the size of that lot, the developer proposed platting two out lots that would be combined with the existing lot. Director Nielsen also noted there would be a difference in the drainage way proposed from the original plat, in that the drainage would be directed to flow into a catch basin in the northerly corner of Lot 2 where a pipe would then direct the water to the street and be taken to the drainage culvert along Grant Lorenz Road. He noted this would alleviate a great deal of tree removal in the wooded area on the site, and as such, was deemed a much better solution to the drainage situation. With regard to the pedestrian walkway to the school grounds, Director Nielsen explained Mike Condon, the school's representative regarding this issue, had indicated the walkway would best be placed between Lots 3 and 4. The tree preservation plan included many protected trees, and with regard to the tree replacement portion of that plan, Director Nielsen stated the plan was consistent with the previous plat with a focus on the north side to further provide a buffer to the neighboring properties. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES March 1, 2005 Page 2 of 6 . Director Nielsen stated he thought this plan was greatly improved over the previous plat, and he recommended approval, subject to WSB's comments regarding the engineering aspects of the plan, as well as the previous recommendations by Staff, and the School District's preference for trail location. He also stated that the proposed out lots should be legally combined with the Sjervold property at the same time the plat was recorded. Brad Paumen, of Maple Lake, stated he was aware the park dedication fees had increased from $1500 to $2000 in this case. He stated he had reviewed the recommendations made by the City and all made good sense. He also stated he would be working with a reputable builder on the project, Tom Stokes of Brenshell Homes. He further stated he thought the request from WSB regarding the drainage issues for the project made good sense. He noted the wooded portion of the site would be considered the best lot and with the woods being retained, he believed a good lot would be made even better. He stated the site was in a nice area, and he was excited for the location and neighborhood, as he was looking forward to doing business within the City of Shorewood on this project. Chris Kahlstrom, 26300 Noble Road, stated he was concerned about the potential additional drainage from the site, as the current drainage overflowed Noble Road each spring without the additional new construction. He was concerned for this issue, as the drainage would be running approximately 30 feet from his house. He also stated he was concerned about the maintenance of this ditch, as the City had promised at the last Public hearing on this case that City Staff would investigate and provide maintenance and he did not believe that had taken place over the past year as promised. Further, he stated he was glad the trees were being kept as part of this project, however, he requested the City address the drainage issues promptly. . William Ruoff, 26265 Noble Road, stated he also was concerned about the drainage issue with regard to the project, as the drainage way overflowed each spring with the snowmelt. He requested the City address this issue also, as his property was located at the bottom of the hill, and his sump pump would run constantly in the spring because of the current drainage patterns. In addition, he had repaired and replaced retaining walls to address severe water problems in his backyard. He stated he liked the alternatives presented by the developer with regard to drainage, however, he requested the developer consider the possibility of placing a berm and trees atop the berm to help the water and visual effects of the development. He also requested the tree reforestation plan include as many trees as possible. Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing. Commissioner Gagne questioned the City's involvement in checking and maintaining the drainage ditch in that area. Director Nielsen stated Engineer Brown had checked the pipes since the last public hearing on this case and found the alleged pipes were believed to be half-full of sediment, when in actuality the pipes were an arched style pipe and were not full at all. He also found the maintenance problem with the ditch was downstream. Commissioner Gagne requested a report be sent to the neighbors regarding the findings of the City Engineer, and having the Public Works Department provide regular maintenance checks on this area. Commissioner Gagne questioned the legal responsibility of the City in the future should drainage issues be increased because of the new construction. Director Nielsen stated he would check the legalities of the issue and report back on this matter in the future. . White moved, Gagne seconded, Recommending Approval of a Preliminary Plat for Arbor Creek for Paumen Properties, LLC, 5610 Grant Lorenz Road. Without objection of the seconder, the maker of the motion amended the motion to include approval of the request subject to all previous Staff recommendations for this site, and subject to CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES March 1, 2005 Page 3 of 6 . the City Engineer's recommendations, as well as resolution of all issues within the final plat for the project. Motion passed 7/0. Chair Bailey closed the Public Hearing. 2. 7:15 P.M. PUBIC HEARING - C.U.P. FOR ACCESSORY SPACE OVER 1200 SQ. FT. Applicant: Rodney Schwartz Location: 26500 Strawberry Court Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing. Director Nielsen explained the applicant had applied for a conditional use permit to construct accessory space in excess of 1200 square feet on the property located at 26500 Strawberry Court. The applicant proposed building a new detached garage to the northwest of the existing house on the property. Since the area of the garage, combined with an existing attached garage, exceeded 1200 square feet, a C.D.P. was required. . He went on to explain the property was zoned R-lA, Single-Family Residential, and contained 39,971 square feet of area. The site was occupied by the owner's house and attached garage. The new garage contained 672 square feet. Combined with the existing garage, the amount of accessory space on the site would total 1427 square feet. The proposed garage would be on the west side of the lot to the north of the existing home. .Director Nielsen also explained the existing house contained 1174 square feet of floor area on the first floor with an additional 894 square feet on the second level, for a total of 2068 square feet. Director Nielsen noted the request complied with all criteria necessary. Rodney Schwartz, 26500 Strawberry Court, stated he would be happy to answer any questions the Commission might have of him, and noted the garage was being built for accessory space and hobby use only. Seeing no one present wishing to speak on this matter, Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing. In response to Commissioner White's question, Mr. Schwartz stated he would keep grass in the new area with an apron in the front of the garage. Gniffke moved, Gagne seconded, Recommending Approval of a Conditional Use Permit for Accessory Space Over 1200 Square Feet for Rodney Schwartz, 26500 Strawberry Court. Motion passed 7/0. Chair Bailey closed the Public Hearing. 3. 7:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING CODE AMENDMENT REGARDING VARIANCE CRITERIA Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing. . Director Nielsen explained through the years, there had been several instances where a request for variance did not meet the current variance criteria for the city and state regulations. He noted the Commission had discussed without action or resolution, the possibility of amending the variance criteria with regard to inclusion of a "public interest" element whereby if the variance would be in the best public interest to grant the request, it could be considered with merit. Director Nielsen went on to explain this matter required further discussion and clarification by the Commission. . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES March 1, 2005 Page 4 of 6 Discussion ensued by the Commission regarding the need for additional information and clarification of issues on this topic. Jackie Colsworthy, 5480 Howard's Point Road, stated she was interested in hearing the process on a zoning amendment. Chair Bailey then stated, based on the direction of Staff, this matter would most likely be revisited at the April 5, Planning Commission Meeting, and noted all Planning Commission meetings were open to the public. Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing. Gagne moved, Conley seconded, Continuing this matter to the April 5, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting. Motion passed 7/0. 4. 7:45 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING CODE AMENDMENT REGARDING THE C- 2. AUTO-ORIENTED. ZONING DISTRICT Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing. Director Nielsen explained the Planning Commission had agreed in a discussion held late in the summer of 2004 that the C-2, Auto-Oriented Commercial district was outdated and of no future use. He noted this public hearing was to consider an amendment to eliminate the district altogether. He further explained this would also involve amendments to any portion of the C-3 district that referred back to the C-2 District and he noted the zoning map would need to be amended to reflect the change. Director Nielsen stated, as discussed in the review of the district, there was one property, located on the south side of Smithtown Road, just east of the LRT Trail, that was zoned C-2. Due to the legalities associated with such a change, he explained it would be necessary to schedule a separate public hearing to rezone that site to R-IC, Single-Family Residential at the same time that the zoning amendment regarding this district would be considered. Chair Bailey requested Staff prepare draft language on such an amendment for discussion at the March 15,2005, Planning Commission Study Session Meeting. Bill Kirchner, 25575 Smithtown Road, stated he was concerned as the owner of the only C-2 property in the City, about the rezoning impacts to his business. He questioned the matter of compensation for this change in zoning status, and noted the site had been in operation since 1932 and maintained since that time. Chair Bailey explained this matter would be discussed at the March 15, 2005 and at the April 5, 2005, Planning Commission meetings, and he encouraged Mr. Kirchner to attend these meetings for additional information. He then closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing. Meyer moved, Gagne seconded, Continuing this Item to the April 5, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting Agenda. Motion passed 7/0. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES March 1,2005 Page 5 of 6 . 5. MINOR SUBDIVISIONS AND LOT SIZE VARIANCES (Reconsideration) Applicant: Matthew Phillippi Location: 21155 Minnetonka Blvd. and 4900 Ferncroft Drive Director Nielsen reviewed the history of this matter, noting this matter had been considered in November of 2004, with the Commission recommending against the variances that were being requested due to lack of hardship. With the understanding that there might be a possible change to the variance criteria, the applicant had requested his application not be forwarded to Council for consideration until the Commission had reviewed a possible change to the criteria for considering variances. Although the Commission had not acted on a proposed amendment to that effect, Staff had committed to the applicant that a revised plan would be scheduled for review at this meeting. Director Nielsen then briefly summarized the revisions to the original plan. He stated the subject lots would be divided to have uniform 70-foot widths. In addition to the nonconformities that would be eliminated or reduced from the original application, the existing house between Lots C and D would have its garage on its respective lot, and the existing lot would be increased from 50 feet in width to 70 feet. With regard to the previous Staff recommendations on this matter, Director Nielsen stated all recommendations were the same with the exception of an increase in park dedication fees as per the ordinance amendment earlier in 2005. He also noted the applicant was present this evening and wished to have the Commission provide feedback on this request. . Matt Phillippi, owner of the properties located at 21155 Minnetonka Boulevard and 4900 Ferncroft Drive, stated he was trying to "clean up" the neighborhood with his request and he had invested a great deal of time and money to that effect. In addition, he stated if the City would not agree to the proposed subdivision, he would be forced to upgrade the existing duplex located on the property, and this was something he did not want to have to do. Mr. Phillippi stated it was his intent to have the duplex utilized in a live burn scenario with the Excelsior Fire District. He thought the entire request would provide a benefit to the community and he thought it was a good chance to resolve issues of nonconformity as well. He stated the existing house had a pending offer of sale upon it, and he noted a sewer stub had been recorded with proposed Lots A and B. He further noted the beauty of the property and stated he wished to maintain that beauty in the area. Discussion ensued by the Commission regarding clarification of lot lines and other options for subdivision. Commissioner Conley questioned the setback issues related to the garage on Lot F. Director Nielsen stated it would remain nonconforming at five feet, but with the current proposal would be on its own lot. Commissioner White stated she thought the current proposal was improved over the original and while the lots were smaller, they would be larger than some existing lots in the area. Commissioner Gagne agreed. Chair Bailey stated he had given a great deal of thought to the existing criteria as it related to this request. He stated he thought the request was clearly economic in nature; however, the current proposal presented was the closest he had seen to resolving the problems in that neighborhood. Commissioner Gniffke agreed. . Commissioner Meyer stated he also agreed with Chair Bailey's comments, noting while it was a great way to cure the problems, he remained uncertain of the hardship. He stated he believed this was an example of a case whereby granting a variance was better than not granting the variance. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES March 1, 2005 Page 6 of6 . Commissioner Gniffke stated he thought the proposed properties had been optimized as presented, and he agreed with Commissioner Meyer's comments Conley moved, White seconded, Recommending Approval of the Revised Minor Subdivision and Lot line Variances, subject to Staff Recommendations as detailed in a Staff memorandum, dated November 10,2004. Without objection from the seconder, the maker of the motion amended the motion to include the Staff recommendations dated November 10, 2004, with the exception of Line Items 3 and 4, and increased park dedication fees per City ordinance. Motion passed 7/0. 6. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. 7. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen stated a Discussion of the Variance Criteria, and a Discussion of a Zoning Code Amendment relating to the C-2, Auto-Oriented Zoning District, and Review of the Comprehensive Plan Summaries would be slated for the March 15,2005, Planning Commission Meeting Agenda. 8. REPORTS . · Liaison to Council Commissioner Gagne reported on matters considered and actions taken at the February 28,2005, Regular City Council Meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). · SLUC No report given. · Other No other business was presented this evening. 9. ADJOURNMENT Gagne moved, Gniffke seconded, Adjourning the March 1, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting at 8:25 P.M. Motion passed 7/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. Sally Keefe Recording Secretary . . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, 15 MARCH 2005 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chair Bailey called the meeting to order at 7:05 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Bailey; Commissioners Conley, Gniffke, Meyer, and Woodruff; Council Liaison Callies and Planning Director Nielsen Absent: Commissioners Gagne and White APPROVAL OF MINUTES · March 1, 2005 Conley moved, Woodruff seconded, Approving the March 1, 2005, Planning Meeting Minutes as amended, by changing the vote on the approval of February 15, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from "7/0" to "6/0/1, with Gniffke abstaining to absence at that meeting." Motion passed 5/0. 1. DISCUSS VARIANCE CRITERIA Director Nielsen explained the history of the variance criteria for the City of Shorewood, noting that occasionally the City received a variance application that appeared to be logical, but did not satisfy the current criteria for granting a variance. In some cases, the applicant proposed improvements that would bring the nonconformity of a property into compliance or buildings much closer to compliance with various codes than what might have presently existed on the site, however, the application did not meet the test of "hardship." To that end, the Planning Staff had suggested the possibility of modifying the criteria to allow variances in certain cases where it would be in the "public interest" to do so, where the overall result of the proposed improvements would result in substantial compliance with zoning and building codes. He noted at the last meeting the Planning Commission had requested examples of instances in the past where this proposed draft language would have impacted the outcome of the vanance. Director Nielsen then reviewed several past case examples where the application had not satisfied the test of hardship, but the public interest might have been served in granting a variance for the applicant. Discussion ensued regarding the various examples presented. Commissioner Conley stated he liked the idea of change as it allowed for flexibility in bringing noncompliant properties further into compliance than would be allowed without the amendment, however, ambiguity also had the potential to be part of the situation as a result. Commissioner Gniffke stated he thought the amendment allowed for too much ambiguity in variance situations. He thought it important to retain the variance criteria as currently presented in the Zoning Code. Chair Bailey agreed. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES March 15, 2005 Page 2 of 4 . With regard to the "public interest" portion of the draft amendment presented, Commissioner Woodruff expressed concern that the Commission would be trying to codify something by definition that was not very precise, and as a result, would only bring additional confusion to a variance situation. He also stated it seemed to the Commission was attempting to define something that could not be described and would have no positive action associated with it. Chair Bailey noted without a motion and second the issue would be considered mute at the Commission level. No motion was presented. Chair Bailey thanked Director Nielsen for his presentation on this issue. Commissioner Gniffke stated he believed this issue should be reviewed annually with the Commission in addition to the annual variance review. 2. DISCUSS ZONING CODE AMENDMENT OF C-2. AUTO-ORIENTED DISTRICT Director Nielsen explained that at its March 1, 2005 Planning Commission Meeting, the Commission continued the Public Hearing on the C-2, Auto-Oriented District, pending an amendment to rezone the one property that would fall into that classification. . Director Nielsen then presented the language that would eliminate the C-2 District and related impacts to the C-3 District. He noted the most significant portion of the amendment would be the additional uses that would pass from the C-2 District to the C-3 District, and that the amendment would also include a change in the Zoning District map, eliminating the C-2 classification and changing the zoning of the one property currently zoned C-2 to R-1C. With regard to the one property currently zoned C-2, Director Nielsen explained the business could be sold and operated as currently being done and the current use would be "grandfathered" in to the District. He clarified that the current operations could continue; however, the use could not change. (For example, the site included an auto repair business currently. That business could not change to an auto accessory store under the proposed amendment.) Director Nielsen also noted the current site and operations were quite restricted. Bill Kirschner, owner of the current C-2 site, questioned the need for the change in zoning for his property. Director Nielsen explained this site was addressed in the City's Comprehensive Plan through the issue of spot zoning. He went on to explain the site did not fit the requirements of a Commercial District nearby, nor did it comply with the requirements of an adjacent Residential District. As such, it was considered spot zoning and the Comprehensive Plan specifically worked to rid the City of spot zoning sites. Mr. Kirschner stated at one time the site was part of a commercial area in the Eureka Township, and he questioned why the City could not allow it to remain under its current classification until such time that he left the site or sold the business. . Chair Bailey explained leaving the site in its current situation established the notion of non-perpetual use, and that was something the City did not want to establish as a precedent. Mr. Kirshner stated he believed such action would limit his ability to sell the business as a viable building and business. Chair Bailey noted that the current business was being allowed to remain, however, he it would not be allowed to perpetuate into the future. In addition, Chair Bailey explained the very PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES March 15,2005 Page 3 of 4 . characteristics that made the site commercial, such as traffic, hours of operation, and noise were not the characteristics of a residential property. He went on to state zoning districts were established for good planning purposes within each municipality and this site should be designated as a residential property in the future. Mr. Kirshner stated he agreed with the rationale being presented, however, he believed this action would change his ability to move forward with his business and would limit the marketability of the site should he wish to sell his business. He also questioned how the City would compensate him for this loss of marketability for the site and his business in the future. Chair Bailey suggested Mr. Kirshner attend the Public Hearing on this matter as part of the April 5, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting for further information on this topic. 3. REVIEW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SUMMARIES Director Nielsen reviewed summaries for the land use and natural environment chapters slated for inclusion in the Comprehensive Plan. Discussion ensued regarding the proposed changes to the summaries. Specific changes were noted to Items 6 and 7 in the Land Use Chapter Summary. Director Nielsen stated he would refine the language presented in this summary and would return this item to the Planning Commission for further discussion and consideration. . 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. 5. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen stated there would be a Discussion on the C-2, Auto-Oriented Zoning District, three public hearings related to two requests for Conditional Use Permits, and Consideration of Rezoning for the C-2, Auto-Oriented Zoning District, as well as a Sketch Plan Review slated for the April 5, 2005, Planning Commission Agenda. 6. REPORTS · Liaison to Council Commissioner Gniftke reported on matters considered and actions taken at the March 14,2005, Regular City Council Meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). · SLUC Director Nielsen noted there was a meeting of the Sensible Lane Use Coalition slated for March 28,2005, at the DoubleTree Park Place Hotel in St. Louis Park, Minnesota from 11 :30 AM to 1 :30 PM on the topic titled Public Good versus Regulatory Abuses. . · Other No other information was presented. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES March 15, 2005 Page 4 of 4 7. ADJOURNMENT Gniffke moved, Meyer seconded, Adjourning the March 15, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting at 8:28 P.M. Motion passed 5/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. Sally Keefe Recording Secretary . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, 5 APRIL 2005 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chair Bailey called the meeting to order at 7:03 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Bailey; Commissioners Conley, Gagne, Gniffke, Meyer, White, and Woodruff; Attorney Keane, Council Liaison Callies and Planning Director Nielsen Absent: None APPROVAL OF MINUTES · 15 March 2005 Conley moved, Gniffke seconded, Approving the March 15, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes as amended, on Page 2, Item 1, omit Paragraph 2 in its entirety. Motion passed 5/0/2, with Gagne and White abstaining due to absence at that meeting. 1. 7:00 P.M. PUBIC HEARING - C.U.P. FOR ACCESSORY SPACE OVER 1200 SO. FT. Applicant: Paul and Nancy Zander Location: 5215 Howard's Point Road Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 7:04 P.M., noting the procedures utilized in a Public Hearing. Any items recommended for approval this evening would be placed on the April 25, 2005, Regular City Council Meeting Agenda for further consideration and discussion. Director Nielsen explained the history of the case, noting the applicants proposed demolishing the existing house located at 5215 Howard's Point Road, intending to build a new home on the property which would include space under the attached garage for additional storage. Total floor area of the two garage levels would be greater than 1200 square feet in area and necessitated a request for a Conditional Use Permit, pursuant to Section 1201.03 Subd. 2.d.(4) of the Shorewood Zoning Code. He went on to explain the property was zoned R-IAlS, Single-Family ResidentiallShoreland and contained approximately 28,008 square feet in area. The garage areas were located on the front of the house and would contain 2180 square feet of area, split evenly between the two levels. The upper level garage faced west, while the lower level garage faced north. Director Nielsen stated the request for a Conditional Use Permit complied with all necessary criteria for this request, however, he noted the lower level garage doors would be double doors, rather than three doors as on the upper level. The Zanders were present this evening and stated they would be happy to answer any questions the Commission may have had of them. Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7: 10 P.M. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES April 5, 2005 Page 2 of8 . While the Commission had no questions regarding this case, Chair Bailey suggested a discussion of accessory space on substandard lots be placed on a future Study Session Agenda for the Commission later in the year. Gagne moved, Woodruff seconded, Recommending Approval of a Conditional Use Permit Over 1200 Square Feet for Paul and Nancy Zander, 5215 Howard's Point Road. Motion passed 7/0. Chair Bailey closed the Public Hearing at 7: 11 P.M. 2. 7:15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - C.U.P. FOR RECONSTRUCTION OF BADGER WELL HOUSE AND PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS Applicant: City of Shorewood Location: 5745 Country Club Road Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 7: 12 P.M. . Director Nielsen explained several years ago the City prepared an improvement plan for its Badger Field property, located at 5755 Country Club Road. At that time the site was occupied by Badger Field Park, City Hall, Shorewood Public Works Department and a pole building housing the Badger Field well. That plan has been mostly implemented, including paving, curbing and striping of parking areas, landscaping and removal of the old pole barn that housed the Public Works Department. Since that time, the Badger well house was placed at the top of the Capital Improvements Program and would be reconstructed as called for in the original plan. He went on to explain the existing well house was located on a separate parcel of land currently zoned C- 3, General Commercial. Surrounding land uses and zoning included a self-service car wash to the north; zoned C-3, the South Shore Senior Center; zoned R-IC, Single-Family Residential to the east, Badger Field Park; zoned R-IC to the South, and an auto repair shop; zoned C-3 to the West. The subject property was occupied by the well house and 14 parking spaces that served the park and Senior Center. The existing building contained 1665 square feet of area, and did not conform to current zoning requirements due to its pole barn construction and proximity to property lines. Also the building's proximity to a steep slope to the north plagued it with drainage problems. It had been proposed that the building be totally replaced. The new building would be one story in height and would contain 1040 square feet of floor area. The new building would be of masonry construction, using rock faced block at its base with a burnished block above. The gable ends would have metal siding above the block and on the fascia and soffits. The roof would be asphalt shingles. Three existing parking spaces for the park and one for the Senior Center would be lost for the driveway to a new parking area on the west side of the new building, however, nine new spaces would replace the four. A sidewalk and security lighting would be located at the rear of the building to provide safe pedestrian access from the new parking to the Senior Center. Proposed landscaping for the site would consist of foundation plantings on the south side and northeast corner of the building. Two sugar maple trees were shown on the west side of the new parking lot with ornamental trees and arborvitae planted along the sidewalk area. . With regard to the analysis of the case, Director Nielsen explained public regulated utility buildings were provided in both commercial and residential zoning districts. He noted several areas of concern including issues related to legal combination of the subject parcel with the Badger Field property, and consideration of rezoning the property from commercial to residential. He also noted various issues including buildings PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES April 5, 2005 Page 3 of 8 . and parking setbacks, screening and landscaping, lighting, and building color. Despite these issues, he recommended the proposed building, parking and landscaping, as proposed, were a vast improvement over what currently existed. Staff recommended the request for Conditional Use Permit be approved, subject to the following conditions: 1. The existing separate parcel must be legally combined with the Badger Field property. 2. Existing trees that will remain on the site should be fenced off pursuant to Shorewood's tree preservation and reforestation policy. 3. The proposed shade trees should be 2.5" caliper rather than 2". 4. The proposed ornamental trees should be 2" caliper rather than 1.5". 5. Lighting shall not exceed Afc at the north property line. 6. Approval of the c.u.P. should be followed up by a rezoning of the site from C-3 to R-IC. A hejrring will be scheduled for 3 May. Seeing no ~me present wishing to speak on this case, Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public iHearing at 7:25 P.M. Commissioner Gagne stated this item had been brought before the Board of the Southshore Community . Senior Ceriter and had been received with great enthusiasm for the changes and parking additions. Commissioner White requested consideration of resizing the lot to remove the "flag" portion of the current lot! and combine it with the Senior Center property. Director Nielsen stated this was a possibility requiring ~dditional Staff consideration. She also questioned the tree preservation plan and requested additional consideration be given to eliminating any part of the parking lot as proposed in order to allow ample tree! growth. She stated drainage issues would only be enhanced should the trees be lost on the hill as a resultiofroot damage due to the parking lot construction area. Commissioner White stated she was comfortable with the potential resizing of the lot being addressed at the Public Hearing on rezoning the site. Meyer m9ved, Gagne seconded, Recommending Approval of the Conditional Use Permit for Reconstruction of Badger Well House and Parking Lot Improvement, subject to Staff Recomme~dations for the City of Shorewood, 5745 Country Club Road. Motion passed 7/0. Chair Bailey closed the Public Hearing at 7:31 P.M. 3. 7:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING FROM C-2. AUTO-ORIENTED C~MMERCIAL TO R-IC. SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL Applicant: City of Shorewood Location: 25575 Smithtown Road e Chair BailfY opened the Public Hearing at 7:32 P.M. i Director Nielsen explained that last year the Planning Commission, in its annual review of the Zoning Code, detenmned that the C-2, Auto-Oriented Commercial District was obsolete and should be eliminated from the cpde. Last month a public hearing was continued, pending a rezoning of the one parcel of land in Shorew90d that had that zoning classification. The subject property was located at 25575 Smithtown Road and Was currently occupied by Lake South Automotive - an auto repair garage. He noted a survey i I I PLANNINb COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES April 5, 2005 Page 4 of8 . of the subject property was not available at this time; however, an aerial photo depicted the existing building and parking areas on the site. The property had 19,961 square feet of area, according to Hennepin County tax records. The site was entirely surrounded by single-family residential development with R-IC zoning to the north and west, and R-IA zoning to the south and east. The Land Use Plan in Shorewood's Comprehensive Plan designated the future land use of the subject property as low to medium density residential. The Area Plan for Planning District 4 stated "Any land use decision relative to the small C-2 property should favor redevelopment to low to medium density residential (one to two units per acre)". Director Nielsen also went to explain when the Comprehensive Plan was being discussed, it was noted that although the auto repair operation was an allowable use in the C-2 zoning district, the existing building did not comply with the setbacks of that district, nor did the existing parking area comply with the standards for commercial property (i.e. setbacks, curbing and striping, and screening from residential property). He also noted the site was essentially unbuildable, due to the requirement that commercial buildings have a 50-foot setback from residential properties. This was considered one of the main reasons that "spot zoning" was so strongly discouraged. . By contrast, the site was very usable as a residential site. He then provided an illustration of the setbacks if the property would be zoned R-IC, Single-Family Residential. He stated it was worth noting that there were two choices as to which residential classification the property should have. Property to the east of the site was zoned R-IA, while property to the south of the site was zoned R-IC. The subject property would not be buildable as an R-IA (40,000 square feet), therefore the R-IC classification was recommended. Next he reviewed how the property would be affected by the change in zoning classification. The property would be "grandfathered in" and the business could continue to be operated as it had in the past. It could be sold as a nonconforming use and a new owner might continue the business as it has been operated in the past. Under the new classification, neither the building nor the parking area could be expanded. However, he noted, that was the case under the existing classification as well, due to the substantial nonconformity of the site. Perhaps the most significant impact of the rezoning was that any change in the existing use of the property would have to be to residential use rather than the list of allowable uses in the C-2 district. Again, the site was quite buildable and usable as a residential property. The property owner had suggested that the "down zoning" of his land represented a taking and questions how he will be compensated arose at the last public hearing on this matter. Staff had contacted the City Attorney to address this issue, and he was present this evening to provide information on that topic. e Attorney Keane summarized a memorandum he had presented to the Commission earlier in the evening regarding issues related to "down-zoning" and whether a zoning change constituted a regulatory taking including denial of an owner's economically viable use of his/her land. He noted in this case, the uses allowed in the auto-oriented commercial district were fairly limited in scope and probably had limited commercial viability given the low volumes of traffic and surrounding residential character of the area. The proposed R-IC District would allow the property owner to redevelop the property as residential use as was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the surrounding land use pattern. Residential lot sales throughout the City had been exceedingly strong in recent history. In addition, he noted the business could remain as was being currently operated or could even be sold as the same business use. Further, there was no sunset clause associated with the use in this case. Thus, it was his opinion that the change in zoning for the property would not constitute a regulatory taking. Bill Kirchner, 25575 Smithtown Road, questioned the urgency of the City to rezone this site at the current time. While he understood the rationale behind the rezoning, he did not understand why this rezoning had PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES April 5, 2005 Page 50f8 . to take place at this point in time. He stated the neighborhood residents and customers had signed a petition opposing the rezoning as they liked having the commercial property in that neighborhood. He stated he worked very hard to take care of the local community where his business resided. In addition, he stated, should the property be rezoned he estimated a loss of value in the price of his business. He stated the change to an R-IC zoning would make the property undesirable as a business since it was no longer easy to finance with a non-conforming use attached to it. He stated he desired to keep the business until his retirement with the sale of the business providing his retirement future. He stated to label his property as a non-conforming use implied that his business was undesirable and as such, the City wished to have his business no longer there. He stated this bothered him a great deal as he worked hard to financially support the local activities in nearby Freeman Park, such as Little League, Hockey and the City's Music in the Park series. He submitted a letter from his attorney into record indicating he would like to have this issue dropped from the Planning Commission's Agenda. He stated that if the City insisted upon moving forward with this matter, he would request a change in the process and some flexibility associated with that change. John Moonen, 25560 Smithtown Road, stated Mr. Kirchner ran a nice clean business without junk, late night or weekend hours, and loud music. He stated Mr. Kirchner had invested a great deal of money into his business and was a benefit to the community. . Cheryl Gilbertson, 26055 Shorewood Lane, stated she had lived next door to this business for the past ten years. She considered Mr. Kirchner and his business one of her most valued neighbors as he was always there for lending support to social and civic issues as demonstrated in the recent past. Further, she was concerned about a City and its residents that would blindly follow a Comprehensive Plan. She stated this particular issue made no sense to her as she lived in an area where commercial and residential uses were mixed and everyone needed a car. She expressed concern for the City taking value from Mr. Kirchner's retirement in proceeding with this rezoning and for a community that would blindly follow a plan without any ethical interest attached to it. John Gorecki, 541 Williams Street, Excelsior, stated he was aware the property had been in use as a commercial use prior to the advent of any Comprehensive Plan, supporting ordinances, and even perhaps the City's inception itself. He stated Mr. Kirchner was not asking for new use of his property. Further, he believed Mr. Kirchner to be an honest business person. He stated he believed the rezoning would deny an economically viable use in this case as the rezoning would be directly responsible for devaluing the property. Residential lots had tripled in the past ten years, and he thought the Planning Commission needed to review the bigger picture associated with this case. In addition, he did not see any urgency to rezone this property. He stated he had been a real estate broker for fifteen years and to include a Conditional Use Permit with the property would devalue the property substantially on the market. He stated people spend more time seeking an honest car mechanic than a doctor and to that end, he noted, Mr. Kirchner provided a vital essential service on that site. Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:57 P.M. In response to Commissioner Conley's question, Attorney Keane stated there would be no change in limitations placed on the property as a result of the rezoning. The property would not be allowed to expand in size or use, however the owner could remodel and operate within the current signage ordinances. . Chair Bailey questioned the responsibility of the Planning Commission to deal with the economic ramifications of the Comprehensive Plan. Attorney Keane explained the test of the issue was whether the owner would be deprived of all viable economic use. He stated logic dictated it to be an absolutely suitable home site in the future, but the City needed to determine if that was considered economically viable use of the land. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES April 5, 2005 Page 6 of 8 . In response to Commissioner Gniffke's question, Mr. Kirchner stated the property had been purchased in 1984, but had been a business since 1932. In response to Commissioner Woodruffs question, Director Nielsen stated the property had been part of the C-2 district since 1973. Commissioner Conley stated he thought there were sobering ramifications to the rezoning, however, he thought the Commission was required to discharge the duties outlined in the Comprehensive Plan and not take into account the financial future of the owner. Chair Bailey stated this issue had been a part of the Comprehensive Plan since 1998, and it was not the intent of the City to make Mr. Kirchner leave the site. He noted the alternative option to sell to any other commercial use would not be supported, and he could not speculate whether someone would pay for the property with either rezoning, however, it was never the intent of the City to drive Mr. Kirchner from his property . Commissioner Gagne questioned Director Nielsen about the urgency of the situation. Director Nielsen explained the City would not support spot zoning, which this site was in this case. He stated to leave the site as is would not support the directives of the Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Gagne stated he thought there was no negative to this situation. Commissioner Gniffke stated that if the issue was not addressed now, it would continue to return in the . future. The role of the Planning Commission was planning and to move the City forward into the future. Chair Bailey reopened the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 8:16 P.M. Mr. Kirchner stated while he understood the desire to meet the Comprehensive Plan directives, he also respectfully requested the City understand his position of value as it related to his property. With a change to residential zoning, his property would not be a desirable purchase for a business owner. Also, while he understood that there would be no daily change in his business as a result of the rezoning, the long term effects of such a decision would affect his family in fifteen years. Mr. Gorecki stated he could also understand why the City would choose to rezone the property, however, that action would truly make the property less desirable to a buyer. He noted conditions on a property affect potential buyers' actions. Ms. Gilbertson requested the Commission review the needs of the community in comparison with the directives of the Comprehensive Plan. She stated this rezoning would only impact Mr. Kirchner as he was the only property owner impacted by the situation. Conversely, to allow the current zoning to remain would also only impact Mr. Kirchner and she did not see that as a problem. As a citizen of Shorewood, she requested the Commission table this issue until some time in the future and remove it from the Agenda this year. Gagne moved, Gniftke seconded, Recommending Approval of Rezoning from C-2, Auto-Oriented Commercial to R-IC, Single Family Residential, subject to Staff Recommendations, for the City of Shorewood, 25575 Smithtown Road. Motion passed 7/0. . Chair Bailey recessed the meeting at 8:23 P.M. and reconvened the meeting at 8:29 P.M. 4. PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING CODE AMENDMENT ELIMINATING THE C-2. AUTO- ORIENTED COMMERCIAL DISTRICT (continued from 1 March 2005) PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES April 5, 2005 Page 7of8 . Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 8:30 P.M., noting this matter had been continued from the March 1,2005, Planning Commission Meeting. Director Nielsen explained that the Zoning Code would need to be amended to eliminate the C-2, Auto Oriented Commercial District as recently recommended in the last item. As a result of this recommendation, a subsequent action by amendment would be necessitated that would place all C-2 uses within the C-3, Commercial District guidelines. Seeing no one present wishing to address this matter, Chair Bailey opened and closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 8:31 P.M. In response to a question from Chair Bailey, Attorney Keane explained that businesses and business trends change so codes needed to have recognition of flexibility of uses within each district. The categorical descriptions might be broader, but the standards for each would still apply. Chair Bailey requested a discussion on the rationale for permitted uses within each zoning district be placed on the Planning Commission Study Session list of topics for the year. Gagne moved, Conley seconded, Recommending Approval of a Zoning Code Amendment Eliminating the C-2, Auto-Oriented Commercial District. Motion passed 7/0. 5. SKETCH PLAN REVIEW - VIRGINIA SHORES Auulicant: Virginia Shores Development, LLC Location: 27975 Smithtown Road . Director Nielsen provided a brief history of this property, noting the main concern for the project at this time was how it related to the project adjacent to it. He stated a formal application would be made in May with additional information for the Commission at that time. 6. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. 7. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen stated there would be a Discussion on the City's Sign Ordinance, Discussion regarding Redefinition of the List of Permitted Uses for Planning Districts and a Discussion on Accessory Space on Substandard Lots placed on the April 19, 2005, Planning Commission's Study Session Meeting. 8. REPORTS · Liaison to Council Commissioner Gniffke reported on matters considered and actions taken at the March 28,2005, Regular City Council Meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). · SLUC . Director Nielsen reported on the March 28, 2005, Sensible Land Use Coalition Meeting on the topic of Public Good versus Regulatory Abuses. · Other Commissioner Gagne requested an update on the Shorewood Nursery site as it related to signage. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES April 5, 2005 Page 8 of8 9. ADJOURNMENT Gniffke moved, Gagne seconded, Adjourning the April 5, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting at 8:50 P.M. Motion passed 7/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. Sally Keefe Recording Secretary . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, 19 APRIL 2005 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chair Bailey called the meeting to order at 7:05 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Bailey; Commissioners Conley, Gagne, Gniffke, Meyer, and White; and Planning Director Nielsen Absent: Commissioner Woodruff and Council Liaison Callies APPROVAL OF MINUTES · 5 April 2005 Gagne moved, Conley seconded, Approving the April 5, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes as amended on Page 6, Paragraph 3, omit Sentence 2 and include "...rezoning; however, he thought the Commission was..." to link Sentence 1 and 3 together. Motion passed 6/0. STUDY SESSION 1. DISCUSS C-3 DISTRICT PERMITTED USES Director Nielsen explained the Planning Commission had begun to review the uses permitted within the C-3 District. To that end, he had provided other municipalities' ordinances on this same topic. He noted many of the cities included in the research, such as Burnsville, Eden Prairie, Roseville, and Woodbury, included the use of lists within the ordinances. He stated cities often provided uses in this format as a way to provide ultimate control, noting there was often an accompanying clause stating if the requested use was not included in the list provided in the ordinance, it was not allowed in that district. He stated discussion might consider a similar format, with modifications. Discussion ensued regarding observations of uses included and excluded from various cities' ordinances. The Commission indicated consensus for the utilization of a list format, however, the idea was also suggested that indicators be provided within the list, whereby if a resident requested a use that could be shown to be substantially similar to a use already on the list, then that use could be allowed. An example of this practice would be to allow a sporting goods store within the District when retail sales were listed in the ordinance. Director Nielsen stated he would provide the Commission with draft language of this ordinance at the next meeting of the Planning Commission. Chair Bailey requested Commissioners also develop a list of potential uses prior to the next meeting for additional comparison. 2. DISCUSS ACCESSORY SPACE RATIO OF FLOOR AREA TO LOT SIZE Director Nielsen explained at its last meeting the Commission questioned the amount of accessory space allowed on substandard lots. Currently, the Code allowed up to 10 percent of the minimum lot size for the zoning in which the property was located. He stated Staff agreed with the suggestion to amend the PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES April 19, 2005 Page 2 of3 . Code. The accessory space provisions were based on scale and proportion, both to lot size and principal building size, and it was therefore appropriate that a substandard lot be somewhat more limited than a standard size lot, regardless of the zoning district. He then shared a proposed change in the ordinance on this issue. The Commission indicate consensus for approval on this draft language. Director Nielsen noted a public hearing on this ordinance change would be held on June 7, 2005. 3. ELECT CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR White moved, Gagne seconded, nominating Jeff Bailey to act as Chair for the next year. Chair Bailey graciously accepted this nomination noting that while he was honored to be nominated to continue in this position he wanted to make certain any other interested Commissioners were allowed the chance to express interest in this position without pressure or repercussion. No other Commissioner expressed interest. Motion passed 6/0. Bailey moved, White seconded, nominating Bob Gagne to act as Vice-Chair for the next year. Commissioner Gagne graciously accepted this nomination with his usual dignity. . Motion passed 6/0. 4. DISCUSS SIGN ORDINANCE Director Nielsen provided an overview of this issue, noting several sections of the ordinance, including definition of the area of a sign, canopy banding, content issues, readability as related to size of the sign and campaign signs, remained to be clarified with the City Attorney More information would be presented at a later date. 5. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. 6. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen stated there would be two public hearings on two requests for Conditional Use Permits for Accessory Space Over 1200 Square Feet, slated for the May 3,2005, Planning Commission Agenda. Given the "light" Agenda, Director Nielsen questioned whether a Study Session topic should be added to the Agenda as well. The Commission agreed this would be a fine idea. 7. REPORTS · Liaison to Council . Commissioner Conley reported on matters considered and actions taken at the April 11, 2005, Regular City Council Meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES April 19, 2005 Page 3 of 3 · SLUC Director Nielsen stated the topic for the next Sensible Land Use Coalition Meeting would be "EAW/EIS- Worth the Paper?" This meeting would be held on April 27, 2005, from 11 :30 A.M. to 1 :30 P.M. at the Double Tree Park Place Hotel in St. Louis Park, Minnesota. All interested Commissioners were encouraged to notify Director Nielsen in the near future. · Other No other matters were presented this evening. 8. ADJO~ENT Conley moved, Gagne seconded, Adjourning the April 19, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting at 8:34 P.M. Motion passed 6/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. Sally Keefe Recording Secretary . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, 3 MAY 2005 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chair Bailey called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Bailey; Commissioners Gagne, Gniffke, Meyer, and White; Council Liaison Callies and Planning Director Nielsen Absent: Commissioner Conley APPROVAL OF MINUTES · 19 April 2005 Gagne moved, White seconded, Approving the April 19, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes as presented. Motion passed 5/0/1, with Woodruff abstaining due to absence at that meeting. 1. 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - C.U.P. FOR ACCESSORY SPACE OVER 1200 SQ. FT. Applicant: Paul and Sheryl Gilbertson Location: 26055 Smithtown Lane Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 7:03 P.M., noting the procedures utilized in a Public Hearing. He also stated any items recommended for approval would be placed on the May 23, 2005, Regular City Council Meeting Agenda. Director Nielsen explained Paul and Sheryl Gilbertson applied for a conditional use permit to construct a detached screen porch on their property, located at 26055 Smithtown Lane. The floor area of the screen porch, when combined with the Gilbertsons' existing detached garage and an existing utility shed brought the total area of accessory space on the property over 1200 square feet. The property was zoned R-IC, Single-Family Residential and contained approximately 48,029 square feet of area. He also stated the existing house contained approximately 1904 square feet of floor area on two floors above grade. The existing garage, located south of the house, on the west side of the lot, contained 864 square feet of floor area. The utility shed was tucked into the wooded area on the east side of the rear of the lot, and contained 168 square feet. The new screen porch will be located in the rear yard, south of the existing garage. It measured 20' x 24' and contained 480 square feet, which brought the total area of accessory space on the site to 1507 square feet. He also noted the Gilbertson's had originally wanted to attach the screen porch to their house; however, there was a mature tree in the backyard that would have been disturbed as a result. Director Nielsen noted the request complied with all criteria associated with the City's Zoning Code, and Staff recommended approval. Sheryl Gilbertson stated their original intent was to attach the porch to the house, however, the mature tree was approximately thirty feet in diameter, and would have required substantial complications. She also . . e PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 3, 2005 Page 2 of3 noted the screen porch would have a cottage-like style to it with a bit more siding, and these changes would be submitted for Director Nielsen for further review. Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:08 P.M. The Commission had no questions related to this case. Meyer moved, Gniftke seconded, Recommending Approval of a Request for a Conditional Use Permit for Accessory Space over 1200 Square Feet for Paul and Sheryl Gilbertson, 26055 Smithtown Lane. Motion passed 6/0. The Commission agreed to select Council Liaisons at this time and hear the report on the most recent Regular City Council meeting, given that the next Public Hearing could not yet take place. Council Liaisons were selected as followed: May 23 and June27 May 9 and June 13 July August September October Commissioner White Commissioner Gagne Commissioner Meyer Commissioner Woodruff Commissioner Gniffke Commissioner Conley The Commission agreed the remainder ofthe months would be determined in the future. In the absence of Commissioner Conley, Chair Bailey reported on the April 25, 2005, Regular City Council meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). 2. 7:15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING- C.U.P. FOR ACCESSORY SPACE OVER 1200 SQ. FT. Applicant: Clark Kent Homes Location: 5835 Eureka Rd Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 7: 15 P.M. Director Nielsen explained Clark Kent Homes recently completed a new home at 5835 Eureka Road and had now applied for a conditional use permit to construct a detached garage that put the property in excess of 1200 square feet. The new garage would be located in the northeast comer ofthe site. He went on to state the property was zoned R-IA, Single-Family Residential and contained 1.5 acres ofland. He also noted the site was occupied by the new home and attached garage. The new detached garage contained 576 square feet. Combined with the existing garage, the amount of accessory space on the site would then total 1436 square feet. The new home contained 3700 square feet of floor area, divided between two of the floors above grade. Director Nielsen also explained that while the proposed pool on the site was not part of this request, it was slated for construction and would be allowed on the site since the hardcover requirements were met. Director Nielsen noted the applicant was not yet present this evening. Seeing no one present wishing to speak on this matter, Chair Bailey opened and closed the Public Hearing at 7:20 P.M. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 3, 2005 Page 3 of 3 . In response to Commissioner Gagne's question, Director Nielsen explained the builder was working with the adjacent neighbor to add a drain tile system in near the northern property line. White moved, Woodruff seconded, Recommending Approval for a Request for Conditional Use Permit for Accessory Space for Clark Kent Homes, 5835 Eureka Rd. Motion passed 6/0. 3. DISCUSS SIGN REGULATIONS Director Nielsen explained this discussion would take place at the next Planning Commission meeting. 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. 5. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen stated a discussion on the sign regulations for the City was slated for the May 17,2005, Planning Commission Meeting Agenda. 6. REPORTS · Liaison to Council . This report was given prior to Item 2. · SLUC Director Nielsen stated the topic for the Sensible Land Use Coalition meeting to be held on May 25,2005, would be The Future Northstar Commuter Rail. Any Commissioners interested in attending were encouraged to let Director Nielsen know as soon as possible. · Other None. 7. ADJOURNMENT Gagne moved, Gniftke seconded, Adjourning the May 3, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting at 7:27 P.M. Motion passed 6/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. Sally Keefe Recording Secretary . . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETNG TUESDAY, JUNE 7, 2005 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chair Bailey called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. Present: Chair Bailey; Commissioners Conley, Gagne, Gniffke, Meyer, White, Woodruff; Council Liaison Callies and Planning Director Nielsen Absent: None APPROVAL OF MINUTES . May 3, 2005 Gagne moved, Gniffke seconded, Approving the May 3, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes as presented. Motion passed 6/0/1. Commissioner Conley abstaining due to absent at that meeting. 1. 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - PARKVIEW PRELIMINARY PLAT Applicant: Location: Bridgeland Development 5025/5045/5055/5075 Suburban Drive Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 7:03 P.M., noting the procedures utilized in a Public Hearing. He also noted matters recommended for approval this evening would be placed on the June 13, 2005, Regular City Council Meeting Agenda. Director Nielsen explained that the applicant, Bridgeland Development, has acquired four parcels of land at 5024 through 5075 Suburban Drive totaling 5.9 acres. The developer proposes to remove the four existing homes and outbuildings and replat the property into nine Single-Family Residential lots. The subject properties are characterized by rolling hills with high points and three wetland basins. Nielsen noted that they are proposing to fill a portion of one of the wetlands. Director Nielsen continued that the property is zoned R-IC, Single-Family Residential. A cul-de-sac street will serve the proposed lots. The lots range in size from 20,520 to 32,390 square feet and average 25,454 square feet. Upon analysis of the preliminary plat, Director Nielsen explained that all proposed lots meet the minimum lot area for the R-IC district in area, width and depth. The building pads all comply with the R-IC building setbacks. The Shoreland District touches the corner of the property, but will have no impact on the project. All lots will be subject to the 25 percent minimum impervious cover limits. He also noted that all developments have to comply with Shorewood's Subdivision Code. The proposed street design is 470 feet long. The paved surface is 24 feet wide, exclusive of curb and gutter width, and the turn around is 80 feet in diameter. The street grade does not exceed five percent. The proposed dimensions are all consistent with the Shorewood's Subdivision Code. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 7, 2005 Page 2 of 11 . Director Nielsen noted that the grading limits are delineated on the plat. The developer will adjust the grading to comply with the requirement that the lowest floor elevations be four feet above the observed water table, including the proposed pond. The garage floor elevations will also be adjusted to keep the driveway grades to less than 10 percent. Director Nielsen continued stating that the drainage will be directed to a proposed pond that will discharge into the wetland and then through an overflow pipe into the pond at Manor Park. He stated that sanitary sewer is available and the developer will be required to pay for sewer access. The development proposes municipal water, however, the connection is approximately 2200 feet to the south. Staff is suggesting that the residents along the proposed route, St. Albans Bay Road to Manor Road and Manor Road to Amesbury, be canvassed to ascertain their interest to connect to municipal water. Staff also suggests that the Council conduct a work session to expedite the project from 2007 to present. Director Nielsen stated that the Code requires the developer to pay park dedication fees of $2,000 per lot, totaling $18,000 for the project. He continued that two items need to be added to the plat; 1) the street must be named; and 2) the plat needs to include "Block I". In addition, Director Nielsen explained that wetland areas cannot be used to calculate lot size. The proposed lots are exclusive of wetland calculations. The wetlands are subject to a 35-foot buffer around wetlands and a 15-foot setback from the buffer. The developer proposes to fill in a small area of a wetland and it will be subject to review and approval of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. . The developer must comply with the tree preservation/reforestation policy. Tree protection fencing is proposed at the construction limits. The property is subject to a replacement of eight trees per acre, or 48 trees. The developer is not proposing street lighting. Any lighting requests would have to be made by future property owners. Director Nielsen stated Staff recommends the proposed preliminary plat be approved, and recommends it include the following conditions. 1. Plans for streets, utilities, grading, drainage and erosion control are subject to the recommendations of the City Engineer. 2. Grading (including the filling of Wetland 2), drainage and erosion control are subject to the recommendations of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. 3. Prior to final plat release, the developer must pay $10,800 in local sanitary sewer access charges. 4. The City Council should hold a work session to discuss the possibilities of expediting the water main connection between the Amesbury and Southeast area water system. 5. Prior to release of the final plat, the developer must pay $18,000 in park dedication fees. 6. The Plat must include "Block 1" and a name for the new street. 7. Wetland buffers must be staked on the property. The development agreement for the plat will address the City's wetland protection requirements, including a conservation easement over the buffer areas. 8. The developer must submit a final tree preservation and reforestation plan, prepared by a registered landscape architect or forester. This plan should be referred back to the Planning Commission prior to final plat approval. . Steve Nelson, developer with Bridgeland Development, stated that he is in agreement with the information presented by Director Nielsen and is working with staff to develop a plat consistent with zoning requirements. Terry Tollman, 4995 Suburban Drive, expressed concern with run-off into an adjacent lowland area. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 7, 2005 Page 3 of 11 Giovanni Orbita, 4965 Suburban Drive, stated that the roadway speed is not posted and expressed concern with roadway speeds and the increased traffic with the new homes proposed. Mr. Orbita expressed concern with any additional run-off into the pond on his property. He also asked if the proposal fits into the overall development plan of the city, noting that development will generate large homes on small lots. Dennis Tierney, 5060 Suburban Drive, expressed concern with drainage due to the volume of water that currently collects in their yard. Mr. Tierney expressed concern with the change in the greenery given the proposed additional lots. Michelle Tierney, 5060 Suburban Drive, agreed with previous speakers regarding the concern with the potential size of homes that would be constructed in the development. She also expressed concern with the overall development of Shorewood and the large homes that alter the green spaces. Tom Schneider, 5000 Suburban Drive, expressed concern with the possible increase of vehicle traffic and that the developer complies with erosion control measures and tree reforestation There being no further comments regarding this case, Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:36 P.M. In answer to Commissioner Gagne's question regarding the drainage pipe across the roadway and overall monitoring of drainage, Director Nielsen stated the drainage from the homes will flow to the street, and will drain from the street into catch basin in the pond on the south and then will overflow via a pipe to a pond in Manor Park. The current pipe out of Manor Park will need to be resized as part of this project. The pond near Amesbury will have little impact. Nielsen noted that the City Engineer and WSB and Associates Engineers and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District have reviewed the drainage plan. The pond is designed to National Urban Runoff Standards, which controls the rate of runoff and treatment of the stormwater that leaves the site. Commissioner Gagne questioned the long-term maintainenance the pond area. Director Nielsen noted that the development would be responsible for maintenance of the pond. However, if the pond receives run-off from outside the development then the City will take on the responsibility of pond maintenance. In answer to Commissioner Conley's question about the Staff recommendation for a Council work session to discuss extension of municipal water, Director Nielsen noted that the Council work session it is not a condition of approval, but a recommendation by staff. In answer to Commissioner White's questions regarding drainage from the pond area on Suburban Drive, Director Nielsen noted that the drainage goes to St. Albans Road via a pipe. Commissioner Gniffke asked if the city can address the concerns with increased traffic on the roadway. Director Nielsen stated that the plan is consistent with zoning and the comprehensive plan and there is no plan to upgrade Suburban Drive. Commissioner White asked if the city can post the road speed. Director Nielsen stated that the city can request a speed study to determine if the road can be posted for less than 30 miles per hour. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 7, 2005 Page 4 of 11 Commissioner Gagne stated that he understands the concerns with the development of large homes, however, if the plan meets the current city zoning standards then the applicant is within their right to make such proposals. Chair Bailey asked if the city can deny an application if the applicant has met all the city zoning standards. Director Nielsen stated that under certain circumstances, for instance, unusual terrain and lot configuration, the city can deny proposed plats. Chair Bailey asked about the limits to construction hours. Director Nielsen noted that the construction hours are limited to 7:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M., Monday through Friday, and 8:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. on Saturday. Commissioner Conley stated that the development is consistent with other subdivisions that have come before the Commission. The reforestation plan and construction barriers need to be enforced. Director Nielsen stated that the Development Agreement is a contract that has financial insurances that all conditions are met. An escrow guarantee is required so that the erosion control fencing is maintained. Commissioner White questioned if it was possible to run watermains to the area now and allow residents to connect with in two years. Director Nielsen noted that it is not a good practice to have dry lines sitting in the ground. Gagne moved, White seconded, Recommending Approval of Parkview Preliminary Plat, Subject to the Conditions in the Staff Report, with the Exception of Item Number Four of The Staff Report, for Bridgeland Development Company. Motion passed 7/0. Planning Commission recessed at 8:02 P.M. Commissioner Conley had to leave the meeting at 8:02 P.M. Planning Commission resumed the meeting at 8:10 P.M. 2. 7:15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - LAKE VIRGINIA WOODS - PRELIMINARY PLAT Applicant: Location: Virginia Shores Development, LLC 27975 Smithtown Road Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 8:10 P.M. Director Nielsen explained that the Virginia Shores Development, LLC have arranged to purchase the property located on the east side of Smithtown Road, north of the Shorewood and Victoria municipal boundary. The property contains 16.4 acres of land, of which 3.3 acres is wetland. The property is currently vacant and zoned R-INS, Single-Family Residential Shoreland. The developer proposes to construct 11 single-family lots served by a cul-de-sac street. Director Nielsen noted that the property is a peninsula of high ground, surrounded on three sides by wetland area. The site is heavily wooded on the upland portions of the property. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 7, 2005 Page 5 of 11 . Director Nielsen stated that the developer has attempted to incorporate the land to the north into this project, however, has not come to terms with the adjoining property owner. The City Ordinance requires that a development provide for the possible development of property adjacent to it, which is why the preliminary plat includes an additional street access. Director Nielsen stated that staff is recommending that this proposed preliminary plat be tabled due to discussions to incorporate the adjacent property. The proposed lots will be served by a cul-de-sac street, approximately 885 feet in length. All lots meet or exceed the minimum size requirements for the R-lNS zoning district. The lots range in size from 40,012 square feet to 60,211 square feet, exclusive of wetland areas. The average lot area is 40,846 square feet. With regard to analysis of the case, Director Nielsen explained the preliminary plat is evaluated on development regulations. The building pads shown on the plan are small relative to the size of the homes that might be constructed. The project is entirely with in the Shoreland zoning district and subject to a maximum impervious surface ratio. In addition, Director Nielsen explained that Lot 2 is divided by a wetland so it will be accessed via a shared driveway off of Smithtown Road and a maintenance agreement will be required for the proposed shared driveway. Due to the distance from Smithtown Road, the house on Lot 2 will have to be sprinklered to comply with Fire Code requirements. . Director Nielsen stated that the grading plan should be revised to include building type and lowest floor and garage elevations for the proposed building pads. The majority of stormwater runoff is conducted to the street, then into a proposed pond located in front of Lots 2 and 3. The rear yards will drain into the wetland areas that border the site. The plat is subject to review and approval of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Nielsen continued that the plat provides drainage and utility easements, 10 feet in width around each of the lots. The developer must pay for local sanitary sewer access charges in the amount of $13,200. Also Park dedication fees totaling $22,000 for the project. In addition, Nielsen added that the plat needs to include "Block 1". Also the lot lines between Lots 4 and 5, and Lots 7 and 8 should be straightened. He went on to explain that as part of the final plat, the developer must provide a plan illustrating where wetland buffer stakes will be placed. The final plat submission should include a separate deed from the property owner to the City providing conservation easement over the wetland buffer areas. Director Nielsen stated that the tree preservation plan is well detailed and the project is subject to replacement of approximately 136 trees. Due to the nature of the extensive tree cover, it is possible that to allow excess trees to be placed on city property or cash in lieu of trees can be contributed to a city tree fund. Director Nielsen noted that street lighting is not included in the plat. e Director Nielsen recommended that the Lake Virginia Woods Preliminary Plat be tabled until the July 5, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting, pending the developer's submission of revised plans addressing planning and engineering issues. Terry Pernsteiner, 11022 Tanglewood Lane North, applicant with Virginia Shores Development, LLC, addressed the Commission, stating that he is in agreement with the information presented by Director . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 7, 2005 Page 6 of 11 Nielsen and is working with staff to develop a plat consistent with zoning requirements, however would request that the plat be given consideration this evening and moved onto the Council on June 13,2005, as he felt they are no closer to an agreement with the adjacent property owner over acquiring the adjoining land. Katharine D. Widin, PhD., Forestry Consultant and Plant Pathologist, provided an overview of her tree inventory and recommendations proposed for the development. Paul Otto, Civil Engineer with Otto and Associates, addressed the Planning Commission and reiterated that the proposed plat does meet the city code. Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 8:40 P.M. John Van Gleson, 545 Smithtown Court, expressed concern with how the project will affect Lake Virginia's water quality. Mr. Van Gleson also expressed concern with lake access and docks for the proposed home sites to Lake Virginia. Bradley Hauser, 535 Smithtown Court, expressed concern with the level of access to Lake Virginia. Lucinda Kirchner, 27415 Maple Ridge Lane, stated that she had served on the committee to develop Shorewood's Land Conservation Report, noting that the subject property was one of the properties discussed for land conservation. Ms. Kirchner asked if there will be lake access and expressed concern with the displacement of wildlife from the proposed development. Ms. Kitchner also asked if the 25 percent impervious surface would be adhered to and what impact the runoff will have on the surrounding wetlands and lakes. Will Wisegarver, 3639 Marsh Street, stated that he is a realtor for ReMax, and has been involved with the family on this project for many years. Mr. Wisegarver stated the family desires to keep the property natural and create a "legacy property". Mr. Wisegarver noted that there is nothing proposed for dock rights or use of the lake at this time. Paul Larkin, 27460 Maple Ridge Lane, expressed concern with the potential size of the new homes. Mr. Larkin also stated that there appears to be a discrepancy with regard to the outlot and abutment to the channel. Susan Stinchfield, 580 Sunny Shadows, expressed concern with the proposed shared driveway that will be adjacent to the their back yard and had questions about the engineering of any house at the proposed location due to the slope of the lot. Mr. Stinchfield also expressed concern about preserving the wetland and wildlife. Wendy Asplund, 590 Sunny Shadows, expressed concern with the shared driveway and tree line along Lots 1 and 2. Mrs. Asplund also expressed concern with the slope of these two lots and how they will accommodate a structure. Fritz Faust, 570 Sunny Shadows, expressed concern with the development and would like an opportunity to speak with the family before the application is decided upon. Christi Lodge, 760 Virginia Shores Circle, asked who currently owns the property. Terry Pernsteiner, applicant, stated that Virginia Shores Development owns the property and the sale is finalized based on city approval. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 7,2005 Page 7 of 11 . Lucinda Kirchner, 27415 Maple Ridge Lane, read from the Shorewood Land Conservation Plan, (page 10) regarding to the city's intent to acquire natural wildlife areas for preservation. There being no further comments regarding this case, Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 9:02 P.M. Commissioner Gagne inquired about the slope and grade of Lots 1 and 2. Paul Otto, Civil Engineer with Otto and Associates, stated that the lots are not a bluff, but are steep and will require a custom design and possible retaining walls. They have proposed a 20-foot shared driveway to minimize the impact to trees and noted that the area may be an area for tree replacement. Director Nielsen noted that because the house will need to be sprinkled, and there is not enough room for a fire truck turn around, it is possible that the driveway could be reduced to 16 feet. Commissioner Meyer asked how the project's impact to Lake Virginia fits into the Planning Commission analysis regarding lake access. Director Nielsen stated that the project will not have docks because it is surrounded by wetland and not lake. The City Ordinance prohibits artificial obstruction in any wetland. In answer to questions regarding impervious surface, Director Nielsen noted that all impervious surface will be limited to 25 percent per property. . Commissioner Woodruff asked if Lot 2 is considered a flag lot. Director Nielsen stated that Lot 2 is not a flag lot, it has road frontage but will be accessed via a private shared driveway. In answer to Co issioner White's question regarding whether the cul-de-sac could be smaller, Director Nielsen stated t at the minimum turn-around required is 80 feet to allow for emergency vehicle and plows. Chair Bailey ask d about the impact on the wetlands from drainage. Director Nielsen tated that he is comfortable with the engineer's review and recommendation. Chair Bailey ask d about the outlot owned by the Lake Virginia Association. Director Nielsen stated that there is a channel out of the north end of Lake Virginia an there is an unbuildable piec of land that abuts the proposed plat area. Director Nielsen ecommended that the preliminary plat be tabled due to several changes that need to take place regarding s aightening lot lines, and a retaining wall in close proximity to the pond, as well as site grading issues. J ly 5, 2005 would be the minimum time necessary to make the changes and represent the plat. . Gagne moved, hite seconded, Recommending to Table the Lake Virginia Preliminary Plat to July 5, 2005, per the taff Recommendations. Motion passed 6/0. PLANNING CO MISSION MEETING MINUTES June 7, 2005 Page 8 of 11 . PUBLIC HEARING C.U.P. TWO HOUSES TEMPORARILY ON ONE LOT . 3. Michael and Jody Laughlin 5665 Howard's Point Road Chair Bailey ope ed the Public Hearing at 9.27 P.M. Director Nielsen explained that the applicants' request to keep the existing home on the property while their new home i being constructed. The applicants have applied for a conditional use permit to facilitate this process. The subject properties were zoned R-IC/S Single-Family ResidentiallShoreland and contains 40,019 square feet of area. The owner's intent is to reside in the existing home during the construction of the new home. Once the new home is completed, the old home will be demolished. Director Nielsen stated that keeping the house will not result in a less desirable location for the new house. The proposed new house will be located in the wider portion of the L-shaped lot and complies with the R-IC/S setback requirements. The proposed home has been situated to minimize removal of existing trees on the property. In addition, the code allows the builder six months to complete the new home and if it is necessary for the owner to request an extension, it should be made prior to the end of the six months. . Director Nielsen stated that staff recommends approval of the Laughlin's request subject to the following conditions: a. The applicants must provide a copy of their contactor's bid for demolishing the older house. b. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicants must provide the city with a cash escrow or letter of credit, for 150 percent of the bid amount, to guarantee that the house will be removed and the site restored. c. The existing house and outbuilding must be removed within six months of the applicant receiving a building permit for a new house. Director Nielsen noted that an email was received from an adjacent homeowner expressing concern with visual impact of the house and suggested the house be shifted or landscaping and trees be placed along the shared property line. Pete Boyer, Contractor with Boyer Builders, addressed the Commission and confirmed that letters of escrow are underway for the removal of the old house upon completion of the new one. Mr. Boyer requested that the six-month time extension be extended. There being no further public comment, Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 9:38 P.M. Commissioner White asked if the Commission could recommend an extension at this time. . Director Nielsen suggested that the applicants come back closer to the end of the six-month period and apply for an extension. Commissioner Gniffke asked if the Commission could make trees or landscape a requirement of approval. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 7, 2005 Page 9 of 11 Director Nielsen stated that it is reasonable to make a recommendation for a landscape plan and requirement to the City Council. Meyer moved, Gagne seconded, Recommending Approval of a Conditional Use Permit to Include a Landscape Plan, Submitted for Approval and Subject to Staff Recommendations, for Michael and Jody Laughlin, 5665 Howard's Point Road. Motion passed 6/0. 4. 7:45 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - MINOR SUBDIVISION/COMBINATION AND C.U.P. FOR ACCESSORY SPACE OVER 1200 SOUARE FEET. Applicant: Location: Dave Raisbeck 26640 Edgewood Road Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 9.27 P.M. Director Nielsen explained the history of the case, noting that the applicants' request to purchase and combine a 50-foot strip of vacated right-of-way in order to combine their landlocked homestead parcel with the parcel fronting Edgewood Road. The subject properties are zoned R-lAlS, Single-Family ResidentiallShoreland. Currently the Raisbeck's homestead parcel contains 34,900 square feet of area, making it substandard for the zoning district that it is in. The nonconformity is increase by the lake of frontage on Edgewood Road. The Elmridge Circle parcel contains 60,314 square feet of area, of which approximately 7750 square feet will be conveyed to the Raisbecks. The applicants propose to construct a detached garage that, when combined with their existing attached garage will exceed 1200 square feet of area. The applicants propose to remodel their existing home, reducing the attached garage to 552 square feet. Director Nielsen stated that there are four criteria for approval of a conditional use permit. 1. The total area of accessory space does not exceed the total floor area above grade of the principle structure. 2. The total area of accessory space does not exceed ten percent of the minimum lot area for the R- 1As zoning district. 3. The proposed garage complies with the setback requirements of the R-IA1S zoning district. A new paved loop driveway will serve both the existing and new garage. An existing driveway on the west side of the property will be removed. Hardcover, as proposed will be 18.5 percent of the lot area. 4. As shown on Exhibits D and E, the new garage will be similar in character to the existing house and garage. As such, the rooflines, materials and architectural character of the garage are consistent with the principle dwelling. Director Nielsen stated Staff recommends approval of the request for division/combination and conditional use permit per the staff recommendations, to the Raisbecks. Jeffrey Watson, Attorney to the Raisbecks, stated that the city needs to vacate the existing easements and the applicants will grant new easements upon vacation of the old ones. There being no further public comment, Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 9:48 P.M. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 7, 2005 Page 10 of 11 Commissioner Woodruff asked if removal of the old driveway was a condition of the conditional use permit. Director Nielsen stated that the applicants are within their impervious cover limits and it is not necessary. Gagne moved, Gniffke seconded, Recommending Approval of the Request for Minor Subdivision/Combination and a Conditional Use Permit per Staff Recommendations and Vacation of Old Easements and Granting New Perimeter Easements. Motion passed 6/0. 5. MINOR SUBDIVISION/COMBINATION (LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT) Applicant: Location: Howard's Point Marina 5400 Howard's Point Road Director Nielsen explained the history of the property, noting Howard's Point Marina owns two properties at 5400 and 5380 Howard's Point Road. The applicants request to rearrange the lot line between the marina property and the residential property. The purpose of the division/combination is to bring their existing dock configuration into compliance with the LMCD Code, which requires docks to be at least 10 feet from the side lot line of the property, extended into the water. Director Nielsen stated that staff recommends approval of the request for minor subdivision/combination. Gniffke moved, White seconded, Recommending Approval of the Request for Minor Subdivision/Combination. Motion passed 6/0. 6. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. 7. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen explained the next meeting of the Planning Commission is set for June 21. The Commission will be reviewing the sign ordinance. 8. REPORTS . Liaison to Council Commissioner White reported on matters considered and actions taken at the May 23,2005 Regular City Council Meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). . SLUC No report given. . Other Director Nielsen reported that he is meeting with developers interested in redevelopment of the Shorewood Yacht Club property. It is not clear what will be done with the property at this time. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 7, 2005 Page 11 of 11 9. ADJOURNMENT Gagne moved, Woodruff seconded, Adjourning the June 7, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting at 10:09 P.M. Motion passed 6/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. Shelley Souers, Recording Secretary . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, JULY 5, 2005 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chair Bailey called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. ROLLCALL Present: Chair Bailey; Commissioners Conley (arrived 7:04 P.M.) Gniffke, Meyer, Woodruff, and White; Council Liaison Wellens and Planning Director Nielsen Absent: Commissioner Gagne APPROVAL OF MINUTES · 7 June 2005 White moved, Gniffke seconded, Approving the June 7, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes as presented. Motion passed 5/0. 1. 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - C.U.P. AMENDMENT FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE Applicant: Minnewashta Elementary School Location: 26350 Smithtown Road Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 7:04 P.M., noting the procedures utilized in a Public Hearing. He also noted items on the Agenda being recommended for approval this evening would be placed on the July 25,2005, Regular City Council Meeting Agenda. Director Nielsen stated the Minnetonka School District proposed building a small accessory structure on the site of the Minnewashta Elementary School located at 26350 Smithtown Road. The structure would be located to the rear of the existing school building, adjacent to the playground area. He noted the school was located in the R-lIA, Single-Family Residential zoning district and the Shorewood Zoning Code required school buildings be processed by Conditional Use Permit. He then characterized the proposed structure as being one story in height, measuring 20' x 30' and containing 600 square feet of floor area. The building would be constructed of wood, with an asphalt shingle roof and a concrete slab for the floor. He also noted the structure was very similar in character to the picnic pavilion in Freeman Park. With regard to compliance with the City Code on this case, Director Nielsen stated due to the setback requirement for the zoning district, the proposed building would be 50 feet from the east side lot line of the school site. Staff recommended the landscaping that was done for the most recent addition to the school be extended to the north by three additional trees. The proposed building would not affect existing parking or necessitate additional parking, nor did the proposed structure affect existing loading or service areas. In conclusion, Director Nielsen stated the proposed structure was consistent with the Shorewood Comprehensive Plan and compatible with residential development, thus, Staff recommended the conditional use permit be approved so that construction of the building could take place this construction season. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 5, 2005 Page 2 of7 . Paul V ogstrom, representative for the Minnetonka School District, stated he would be happy to answer any questions the Commission had of him. Chair Bailey closed Public Testimony at 7:08 P.M. Commissioners clarified various aspects of the case. Conley moved, White seconded, Recommending Approval of the Conditional Use Permit as presented, subject to Staff Recommendations for Minnewashta Elementary School, 26350 Smithtown Road. Motion passed 6/0. Chair Bailey closed the Public Hearing at 7: 10 P.M. 2. 7:15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - C.U.P. FOR FILL IN EXCESS OF 100 CUBIC YARDS AND MINOR SUBDIVISION Applicant: Ann Meldahl Location: 6180 Cathcart Drive Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 7: 15 P.M. . Director Nielsen explained the applicants were the owners of the property at 6180 Cathcart Drive Last fall, as the result of a neighborhood complaint, the City cited the applicants for placing fill and grading on the site without necessary permits. The property owners were directed to either remove the fill and restore the site, or apply for a conditional use permit. Due to concerns over drainage, the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) issued a similar order, directing the applicants to submit an erosion control plan and to apply for a fill permit. He went on to explain City Staff subsequently met with the owners to discuss issues associated with the fill and grading work, and to review the process of obtaining a conditional use permit for fill in excess of 100 cubic yards. Since then, they had commissioned a landscape architect to prepare grading and landscaping plans. As explained in their request letter, the applicants proposed regrading the site, by creating a series of shallow berms, with a swale to restore the previous flow of drainage through the site. Director Nielsen also went on to state the property was zoned R-IA, Single-Family Residential, and was presently occupied by the applicant's home, an attached garage and a detached garage. Director Nielsen then explained that Shorewood's Zoning Code required a conditional use permit whenever more than 100 cubic yards of material was brought onto a site. This equated to approximately 10 dump truck loads of dirt. The subject fill on the site has been spread out, making it difficult to determine how much material had been placed, but it was estimated that it amounted to several hundred yards. He the reviewed the proposed grading plan for the property, noting the main issues appeared to be the effects of the grading on the site and adjacent properties. He explained drainage on this site would run from north to south, and the City's concern was that improper placement of fill could back up storm water runoff upstream or force the natural drainage onto adjacent properties. Director Nielsen stated the applicants advised the City that the Watershed District had approved their grading plan and they had received a fill permit from the District to be presented to the City this evening. Director Nielsen then explained that an old culvert located at the south end of the applicant's property aggravated the drainage issue. After investigation earlier in the day, he explained this culvert was not functional and appeared to have been filled in on the south side of West 62nd Street. As a result, the City would be working with the City of Victoria to restore the flow that once existed in that area. . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 5, 2005 Page 3 of 7 . Director Nielsen stated any approval of the conditional use permit should be subject to the recommendations of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed and the City Engineer. The grading work and site restoration should be required to be completed no later than September 15, 2005. Finally, the grading plan must be signed by a registered engineer or landscape architect. Steve Kronin, 6135 Cathcart Drive, stated he was concerned that additional water would potentially be draining across Cathcart Drive onto his property as he already had an abundance of water in his yard. Director Nielsen stated he did not believe any of this water should be backing up to Mr. Kronin's property once the culvert was opened. Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7: 18 P.M. Chair Bailey questioned the process necessary should the current situation deteriorate into legal action between parties involved. Director Nielsen explained the applicants and the City rely on the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Staff to provide a fill permit for this case, and a licensed engineer would have had to sign off plans associated with the project, thus, recourse could be secured through those parties. He further explained the applicants had made appropriate efforts in this process, noting a double fee had been paid as was a matter of normal process. Additionally, legal action would be pursued should the process not be followed in the next phases of the planning process, as well as the contractor being sued. With regard to the landscape plan, Director Nielsen stated the City wished to see grass returned to the fill area and the site restored to avoid erosion and filling the culvert on site. He stated the City would be relying on the MCWD Staff and engineer to provide appropriate calculations for the swale detail on the site. . Commissioner Conley stated he did not believe enough information had been supplied at this time and suggested additional information be secured from the MCWD, City Engineering Staff, and the applicant prior to proceeding further in the planning process. Commissioner Gniffke agreed. Ann Meldahl, applicant for the case, presented Director Nielsen with the appropriate fill permit from the MCWD, and stated she had lived on the site for 51 years, with the last eight months being difficult as a result of the fill issue. She stated there had never been water on her property until recently. She noted there were two "holding ponds" that filled with water each spring on her property, and she continually noted the water was three feet lower than the roadway surface and was not apt to drain. Further, Ms. Meldahl stated the plans for the fill were necessary only to improve the water from the north that came onto her property, and she had provided a swale for appropriate drainage on her property. The consultants she had worked with to provide drainage and landscaping plans had both indicated the fill plans would not be a problem to complete and would not provide additional water flow to others property as a result of this project. The water that was on her property was coming on to it from other properties to the north of her and drained to the culvert area. She requested the Commission allow her to move forward with her current plans in order to bring resolution to this situation. Director Nielsen stated correspondence had been received from two area residents and the Hennepin County Railroad Authority regarding this project. . Commissioner White questioned the responsibility oflowering the culvert and associated issues. In response to this question and others from other various Commissioners, Director Nielsen stated the person desiring it to be lowered would most likely be responsible; however, he would need to verify the city's responsibility in this matter. He further stated blocking the natural flow of water was not an option in any event in this case. City Engineers from Shorewood and Victoria would need to review the situation and provide adequate information on the culvert issue as a separate matter. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 5, 2005 Page 4 of 7 . White moved, Meyer seconded, Recommending Approval of the Conditional Use Permit for Fill in Excess of 100 Yards, subject to all Staff Recommendations, and the culvert being opened to allow water to exit from the Shorewood side of the culvert. Motion passed 6/0. 3. PUBLIC HEARING - LAKE VIRGINIA WOODS - PRELIMINARY PLAT Applicant: Location: Virginia Shores Development, LLC 27975 Smithtown Road Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 7:40 P.M. Director Nielsen explained this item was a continuation of a Public Hearing held on June 7, 2005, pending resolution of a number of issues raised by City staff. The developer had since submitted a revised plat addressing those issues. Director Nielsen noted the most significant change in the plat was that the developer had agreed to work with the property owner to the north by combining the two parcels and eliminating the need for a street extension and a future cul-de-sac to serve the northerly parcel. He explained this not only resulted in vastly superior lots from the original plat, it resolved at least one of the issues raised by the City's engineering consultant (the retaining wall), as well as lot configuration issues raised by the Planning Department. . Director Nielsen went on to state all of the proposed lots exceeded the minimum size requirements for the R-IA1S zoning district, ranging in area from 41,216 to 63,202 square feet. The building pads shown on the revised grading plan (Exhibit B) appeared quite ample for the size of homes that would undoubtedly be built in this development. Although the grading plan had been revised to show larger building pads, it still lacked the detail required by the City Engineer. The pads were shown as being "custom graded", which was somewhat common for large custom homes. The City, however, required the grading plan to show low floor and garage floor elevations on the grading plan. This grading plan should be submitted as part of the final plat. It should be noted that, with the possible exception of Lots 1 and 2, none of the lots required significant site alteration beyond what was necessary to build the homes. With regard to the common driveway for Lots 1 and 2, he stated the plan demonstrated the driveway at 14 feet in width. Anything less than a fire access road (20 feet wide with adequate emergency vehicle turn- around) required that the house on Lot 2 be sprinklered. It was also recommended the driveway be at least 16 feet in order to accommodate two cars passing one another. Further recommendations included the final plat must include an easement/maintenance agreement between Lots 1 and 2 as well as a conservation easement over the wetlands and the wetland buffer areas. As always, prior to the release of the final plat, the developer would be responsible for providing payment of fees for the local sanitary sewer access charges, park dedication fees, and municipal water connection charges. Director Nielsen also suggested one additional recommendation that the trees around the ponding area and along the southerly portion of the property include replacement trees focused in those areas. In conclusion, Director Nielsen stated the revised plat was vastly improved by virtue of combining the two properties. It was therefore recommended that preliminary plat approval be granted subject to the preceding and above recommendations and those of the City's engineering consultant. Terry Pernsteiner, representative of Virginia Shores, LLC, thanked the Commission and Staff for the time and efforts associated with this project. He stated he had spoken with the neighboring homeowner regarding driveway concerns that should no longer be a problem. Further, he stated Staffs recommendations would be followed regarding replacement tree efforts. . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 5, 2005 Page 5 of7 . Paul Otto, engineer for the project, stated, with regard to the grading plan, there were no anticipated problems with grading for the custom home sites, and an accurate plan would be provided with the final plat. He also stated he had spoken to the City Engineer with regard to the driveway and grading. John Van Geeson, 545 Smithtown Court on Lake Virginia, stated he wished to confirm the fact that there were no lake shore lots associated with this project, as he had received information from a realtor recently indicating lake shore lots would be available as part of this project. He stated he and other areas residents he was representing were concerned for the lake access through dockage, as well as water quality, and wetland protection associated with this project. He further stated, as taxpayers, they wished to see preserve the lakes and wetlands in that area. He noted several instances on Lake Virginia where riparian rights had been taken not granted, and he was concerned this would also happen in this case. Wendy Asplund, 590 Sunny Shadows, stated she was a recent resident to the area, and was quite concerned about the small amount of land between her property and the common driveway. She also stated she was concerned about the drainage and stormwater runoff from the proposed properties and questioned what could be done to ensure there would be no water ponding in her backyard as a result of this project. She stated she had a great amount of privacy currently and would like to see as many trees as possible retained in the adjacent property line as possible to maintain that privacy. Any trees leftover from the project could be placed in the property line area as well. Ms. Asplund further stated she believed the two additional houses placed on the properties adjacent to her property were there to maximize the property, and she was concerned for the amount of excavation taking place in such a small area as well as the narrow width to the proposed driveway posing a public safety hazard in the house to be "sprinklered.:" fu conclusion, she stated, she was concerned for the protection of her property, home, and family, and asked consideration be given to the setback issues associated with the driveway, as well as reforestation of the properties adjacent 0 to hers with a berm for her property and the adjoining neighboring property owned by the Stinchfields. . John Stinchfield, stated he had owned his property for fifteen years, and knew one day the properties behind him would most likely be developed so he was understanding the efforts of the project, however, he agreed with Mrs. Asplund regarding the two additional houses on the project property being there to maximize the profit to the developer. He requested several trees be placed on the adjacent property line to ensure privacy, and he was also concerned for the safety and maintenance of the common driveway as well as the inability to have fire safety equipment in the area. He stated he believed the more trees that could be saved on the properties adjoining his would only enhance the property value for the new owners. Lucinda Kirchner, 27415 Maple Ridge Lane, questioned whether the site was an old fudian burial mound site, given its history and proximity to the lake. Director Nielsen stated he was uncertain of this property being a burial site, however, if there was evidence indicating such, than the City would need to be made aware ofthat site. Bradley Houser, 535 Lakeshore Court, questioned what prevented people from dredging wetlands to access Lake Virginia or Lake Minnetonka from this property. He stated he was concerned about the potential actions for dredging and filtration issues that would degrade the water quality. Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 8:09 P.M. Director Nielsen explained, in response to a question from Commissioner White, once an owner purchased the property, than that owner owned the trees at will. He noted preservation occurred in the planning and construction phases of a project, and the developer was typically amenable to requests, since potential homeowners often liked mature trees to remain on lots. . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 5, 2005 Page 6 of7 . In response to questions by Commissioner Woodruff, Director Nielsen explained the topography of Lot might demonstrate that the lot needed to be graded in order to provide a buildable site pad for a house. He also noted City Code would not allow the grade on the property to be greater than 3: 1. Director Nielsen then clarified the City's policy regarding "compel to comply" issues, noting that should a property owner not respect the direction stated in the City Code regarding compliance, the City would seek legal action against that homeowner to bring the property into compliance. Chair Bailey clarified that the drainage on the driveway would be directed toward the wetland from Lots 1 and 2. Mr. Pernsteiner stated the project developer would commit to a lO-foot driveway, and the mature walnut trees, having a diameter near twenty inches, would remain on the property. He further noted Lot 2 was a wonderful lot overlooking the wetland area. With regard to the pond on the project, he stated, that area would be left in a natural stated, due to a conservation easement over that area. Woodruff moved, White seconded, Recommending Approval of a Revised Preliminary Plat for Lake Virginia Woods, subject to all previous Staff recommendations, a 10 foot driveway setback, and retention of the mature trees on the lots. Motion passed 6/0. Chair Bailey recessed the meeting at 8: 21 P.M. and reconvened the meeting at 8:28 P.M. 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR . There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. 5. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen stated a discussion on the sign ordinance would take place at the Study Session meeting of the Planning Commission slated for July 19, 2005. He also noted a report would be provided at that meeting for the Commission regarding any potential redevelopment of the Lake Minnetonka Yacht Club property as outlined in the City's Comprehensive Plan. 6. REPORTS · Liaison to Council Commissioner White reported on matters considered and actions taken at the June 27, 2005, Regular City Council Meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). Recording Secretary Keefe requested clarification on the schedule for the Council Liaison position for the remainder of the year. The Commission indicated the following schedule for that position: . July August September October November December Commissioner Woodruff Commissioner Meyer Commissioner Gniffke Commissioner Conley Commissioner Gagne Undecided . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 5, 2005 Page 7 of7 · SLUC No report given. · Other There was no other business presented this evening. 7. ADJO~ENT Conley moved, White seconded, Adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of July 5, 2005, at 8:54 P.M. Motion passed 6/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. Sally Keefe Recording Secretary . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, JULY 19, 2005 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Acting Chair Gagne called the meeting to order at 7:02 P.M. ROLLCALL Present: Acting Chair Gagne; Commissioners Conley, Meyer, White and Woodruff; Council Liaison Wellens and Planning Director Nielsen Absent: Chair Bailey (arrived at 7: 11 P.M.); Commissioner Gniffke APPROVAL OF MINUTES · July 5, 2005 Conley moved, White seconded, Approving the July 5, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes as amended to include Commissioner Woodruff as present in the Roll Call. Motion passed 4/0/1, with Gagne abstaining due to absence at that meeting. 1. DISCUSS SIGN ORDINANCE Director Nielsen explained this item had been postponed until a date in the future. 2. DISCUSS REDEVELOPMENT ISSUES OF PLANNING DISTRICT NO.6 Director Nielsen stated he had received several inquiries recently regarding the commercial properties in Planning District 6 that could potentially be slated for redevelopment. Based on these requests, Director Nielsen stated it was prudent to begin to discuss possible issues associated with redevelopment of this district. He then reviewed the physical characteristics of the district as well as the surrounding land use and zoning for the properties discussed. Next, he reviewed the issues associated with the commercial properties located in the district. Chair Bailey arrived at 7: 11 P.M. and Acting Chair Gagne gave control of the meeting to Chair Bailey. Director Nielsen stated he had explained to interested developers that the current properties' use was the use established in the current Comprehensive Plan for the City and to make changes to those uses would require a Comprehensive Plan amendment by the City. Commissioner Conley stated he was quite excited to see such a proactive approach being taken by the City for this district. He stated it was a "gateway" entrance for the City, on the easterly side of this district, with a strong commercial presence in that area. He stated this district also was near the service district associated with the Public Safety Facility and consideration should be given to blending the needs of those two districts. In addition, he thought it important to preserve green space in any redevelopment of the district, and he noted the lake views would allow for image and as an amenity in this district. . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 19, 2005 Page 2 of2 Commissioner Gagne stated he would be opposed to allowing this district to be rezoned to residential only due to concerns about increased density and the associated traffic ramifications with accessing County Road 19 in that area. Commissioner Woodruff stated he thought the district might lend itself to a Planned Unit Development as a compromise to the residential zoning issue. Discussion ensued by the Commission regarding the ramifications associated with changing the Comprehensive Plan and the process for doing so. Council Liaison Wellens stated he had several questions related to potential redevelopment of this district. He suggested working with various agencies including the Hennepin County Railroad Authority, the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District, the City of Excelsior and the Shorewood Yacht Club for any future plans for this district. Discussion ensued regarding meeting with the Council in a Joint Work Session Meeting format for this district. All agreed this meeting would be beneficial. Discussion also ensued regarding further consideration of these redevelopment issues at a future meeting of the Planning Commission. 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. 4. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen stated there was a public hearing for a variance to build on a substandard lot, and a review of the landscape plan for a preliminary plat for the Parkview project on Suburban Drive slated for the August 2,2005, Planning Commission Meeting Agenda. 5. REPORTS · Liaison to Council Commissioner Woodruff reported on matters considered and actions taken at the Julyll, 2005, Regular City Council Meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). · SLUC Director Nielsen announced the topic for the next meeting of the Sensible Land Use Coalition (SLUe) would be "Bloomington Central Station: The Third Urban Center." Interested Commissioners were encouraged to submit registration forms promptly. · Other There was no other business presented this evening. 6. ADJOURNMENT Gagne moved, Woodruffseconded, Adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of July 19, 2005, at 8:25 P.M. Motion passed 6/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. Sally Keefe, Recording Secretary . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, AUGUST 2, 2005 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chair Bailey called the meeting to order at 7:01 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Bailey; Commissioners Conley, Gagne, Gniffke, Meyer, and Woodruff; Council Liaison Wellens and Planning Director Nielsen Absent: Commissioner White APPROVAL OF MINUTES · 19 July 2005 Gagne moved, Woodruff seconded, Approving the July 19, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes as presented. Motion passed 5/0/1, with Gniftke abstaining due to absence at that meeting. 1. 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE TO BUILD ON A SUBSTANDARD LOT Applicant: Craig Buechler Location: 5655 Eureka Road Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 7:02 P.M., noting the procedures utilized in a Public Hearing. He also stated items be recommended for approval would appear on the August 22, 2005 Regular City Council Meeting Agenda. Director Nielsen explained that in January 2003 the City granted a variance to Craig Buechler to build a new home on a substandard lot, located at 5655 Eureka Road. Mr. Buechler did not use the variance within the required one year deadline and the approval lapsed. He had since submitted a similar variance request with slightly different house plans. Director Nielsen also stated the issues and analysis from the 2002 staff report were still valid. The recommendation from the previous request included a condition that the plans be modified to comply with the maximum impervious surface requirement (33%). The new site plan complied with both setback and hardcover requirements for the R-IC district. Proposed hardcover was 32.7 percent. The only remaining issue requiring resolution was the height of the structure. The plan illustrated a three-story structure, 36.5 feet in height, while the Code limited residential structures to 2.5 stories and 35 feet. As such, the building required adjustment to comply with the maximum requirements of the Zoning Code. Staff recommended the variance request be approved, subject to the applicant revising the plans to comply with height requirements provided in the Zoning Code. Craig Buechler, 5655 Eureka Road, clarified scale issues associated with the plans submitted and presented to the Commission for this meeting. He stated since this application was essentially repetition of the original variance request, he had little more to add at this time. He stated he would continue to work with Director Nielsen to resolve the height issues associated with this request to bring it further into compliance with the City's ordinances. . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES August 2, 2005 Page 2 of3 Seeing no one present wishing to address the Commission on this matter, Chair Bailey opened and closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7: lOP .M. Commissioners clarified various aspects of the plans for the site. Chair Bailey stated he was quite impressed with the efforts put forth by Mr. Buechler regarding placement of the house in the buildable area of the lot as well as timely demolition of the previous house on the site. He thanked Mr. Buechler for being a cooperative partner in working with the City in this request. Gniftke moved, Gagne seconded, Approving a Variance to Build on a Substandard Lot, subject to all Staff recommendations, for Craig Buechler, 5655 Eureka Road. Motion passed 6/0. 2. REVIEW LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR P ARKVIEW PRELIMINARY PLAT Applicant: Bridgeland Development Co. Location: 5025/5045/5055/5075 Suburban Drive Director Nielsen explained that at the June 7, 2005 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission recommended approval of the Parkview preliminary plat subject to the submittal and review of a final landscape plan for the project. This landscape plan had since been submitted and he requested the Commission review it this evening. He then briefly reviewed the project site, noting a great deal of landscape material had been placed near the proposed site entrance on Suburban Drive. Further he stated, additional landscaping materials would be placed near the northwest comer of the project, and wetland vegetation placed around the wetland area in the southwest comer of the property to act as a buffer. He noted the landscape plan complied with City requirements, and the only remaining issue was that the southerly boundary remained fairly exposed especially for proposed Lots 6 and 7 near the tennis courts located in Manor Park. He requested the City remain "open" to the idea of allowing additional trees to be planted along that edge of the project in addition to the other recommendations made by Staff. Conley moved, Meyer seconded, Approving the Landscape Plan for Parkview Preliminary Plat, subject to Staff recommendations, for Bridgeland Development Company, 5025/5045/5055/5075 Suburban Drive. Motion passed 6/0. 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor brought to the attention of the Commission at this time. 4. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen noted there was a personal conflict with the date of next regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission and he requested the Commission consider meeting on Tuesday, August 23,2005 instead. The Commission agreed. Director Nielsen noted the revised meeting date would include a Study Session Meeting Agenda devoted entirely to signage issues. 5. REPORTS · Liaison to Council . Commissioner Woodruff reported on matters considered and actions taken at the July 25, 2005, Regular City Council Meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES August 2, 2005 Page 3 of 3 · SLUC No report given. · Other None. 6. ADJO~NT Gagne moved, Woodruff seconded, Adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of August 2, 2005, at 7 :25 P.M. Motion passed 6/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. Sally Keefe Recording Secretary . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, AUGUST 23, 2005 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. NUNUTES CALL TO ORDER Chair Bailey called the meeting to order at 7:02 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Bailey; Commissioners Conley, Gagne, Gniffke, Meyer, and Woodruff; and Planning Director Nielsen Absent: Commissioner White and Council Liaison Wellens APPROVAL OF MINUTES . August 2, 2005 Gagne moved, Conley seconded, Approving the August 2, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes as presented. Motion passed 6/0. 1. DISCUSS SIGNAGE ISSUES Director Nielsen explained that for several months he had sought to provide clarity regarding signage issues within the City's ordinances as part of the Work Program for this year. He stated upon review he believed the ordinances to be in need of slight revisions without significant overhaul. To that end, he explained, he wanted to provide the Commission with a slide presentation regarding different aspects of signage for contemplation with additional discussions to follow at a later meeting. He stated the purpose of signage was to provide identification of businesses and certain pieces of property. In addition, aesthetics played a role in signage and should work to prevent visual clutter. Director Nielsen then reviewed 28 different photos and noted several components of signage within each picture. Next, he reviewed the current City ordinances and proposed suggestions for change. Discussion ensued regarding how best to enforce or regulate signage issues with businesses that would not adhere to current sign ordinance regulations. Discussion also ensued regarding appropriate sizing of signage for various buildings and structures. The Commission indicated consensus for allowing administrative approval to prevail on temporary and permanent sign permit requests rather than being routed through the City Council approval process. Director Nielsen stated additional information would be presented and discussed on these topics at the September 20,2005, Study Session Meeting of the Planning Commission. 2. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES August 23, 2005 Page 2 of2 4. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen stated there were three public hearings regarding a Conditional Use Permit for Accessory Space Over 1200 Square Feet, Rezoning from R-IA, Single-Family Residential to R-2A, Single or Two- Family Residential, and Rezoning from C-3, General Commercial, to R-IC, Single-Family Residential, as well as a request for Minor Subdivision and a Minor Subdivision/Combination slated for the September 6, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting Agenda. 5. REPORTS · Liaison to Council Director Nielsen reported on matters considered and actions taken at the August 22,2005, Regular City Council Meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). · SLUC Director Nielsen announced the topic for the next meeting of the Sensible Land Use Coalition (SLUe) would be "Kelo v. New London, Conn.". Interested Commissioners were encouraged to submit registration forms promptly. · Other There was no other business presented this evening. 7. ADJOURNMENT Woodruff moved, Gagne seconded, Adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of August 23, 2005, at 9:00 P.M. Motion passed 6/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. Sally Keefe Recording Secretary . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, 6 SEPTEMBER 2005 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chair Bailey called the meeting to order at 7:04 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Bailey; Commissioners Conley, Gagne, Gniffke, Meyer, White and Woodruff; and Planning Director Nielsen and Council Liaison Wellens Absent: None APPROVAL OF MINUTES . 23 August 2005 Gagne moved, Gniffke seconded, Approving the August 23, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting minutes as amended on Page 2, Item 5, change "Commissioner Meyer reported" to Director Nielsen reported." Motion passed 6/0/1, with White abstaining due to absence at that meeting. 1. 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - C.U.P. FOR ACCESSORY SPACE OVER 1200 SO.FT. Applicant: Vernon Compton Location: 25765 Smithtown Road Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 7:05 P.M., noting the procedures utilized in a Public Hearing. He also explained that items recommended for approval on this evening's Agenda would be placed on the September 26,2005, Regular City Council Meeting Agenda. Director Nielsen explained the applicant had applied for a conditional use permit to construct accessory space in excess of 1200 square feet on the property located at 25765 Smithtown Road. Mr. Compton proposed building a new utility shed to the west of an existing shed which is west of the house on the property. Since the area of the shed, combined with the existing shed and an existing attached garage, exceeded 1200 square feet, a C.U.P. was required. He went on to explain the property was zoned R-lC, Single-Family Residential and contained 59,961 square feet of area. The site was occupied by the owner's home and attached garage, and a 20' x 27.8' shed. The existing garage contained 720 square feet. The existing shed contained 667 square feet. Adding the proposed 10' x 20' shed added 200 square feet for a total area of 1587 square feet. The new shed would be approximately 30 feet from the south side of the site and 70 feet from the H.C.R.R.A. trail that formed the northerly boundary of the property. In addition, he explained the existing home contained a little more than 1800 square feet of floor area above grade. Director Nielsen also explained the request complied with all criteria set forth in the Zoning Code for this matter. However, he also noted the total area of impervious surface on the property was not known at this time, however, it was expected to be well under the 33 percent maximum. Since the structure was relatively well screened from view of adjoining properties by existing vegetation additional screening was not CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES September 6, 2005 Page 2 of7 . considered necessary. Further, he stated he had received elevation drawings earlier in the day that demonstrated the proposed building complied with the City's height requirements. Based upon the preceding analysis, it was recommended the applicant's request for a conditional use permit be granted, subject only to the standard warning that such structures were for residential use only, and that any type of home occupation conducted within an accessory building must obtain a separate permit. Vernon Compton, applicant, stated he would be happy to answer any questions the Commission had of him at this time. Seeing no one present wishing to comment on this case, Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7: lOP .M. In response to questions by Commissioner Conley, Mr. Compton explained that spoil board was a composite board product similar to particle board typically used in cabinetry, and he was recycling parking lot barriers as footings for this structure. Gagne moved, White seconded, Recommending Approval of a Conditional Use Permit, subject to Staff Recommendations, for Vernon Compton, 25765 Smithtown Road. Motion passed 7/0. Chair Bailey closed the Public Hearing at 7:14 P.M. 2. 7:15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING FROM R-IA. SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO R-2A. SINGLE OR TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL Applicant: Mark Kennedy Location: 23975 Yellowstone Trail . Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 7:15 P.M. Director Nielsen explained the applicant, Mark Kennedy, owned the property at 23075 Yellowstone Trail. He had requested a rezoning of the property from R-1A, Single-Family Residential to R-2A, Single and Two-Family Residential, to facilitate a subdivision of the property into two lots. The subject property contained 44,045 square feet of area and was currently occupied by Mr. Kennedy's home and a detached garage. He noted the land use and zoning surrounding the property to the north included single-family residential; zoned R-1A to the east included Lake Linden (wetland); zoned R-1C; to the south included two-family dwelling; zoned R-2A; and to the west included single-family residential; zoned R-1A. Director Nielsen then displayed a zoning map of the area, noting there were several possibilities for rezoning that would be logical for this property. He also stated evaluation of any rezoning request should be based upon the Comprehensive Plan. In addition, it was important to understand if the property could be developed under the proposed zoning. With respect to the Comprehensive Plan, the current land use designation for the sit was "Low Density Residential, 1-2 Units Per Acre". Since the property south of the applicant's was zoned R-2A, the rezoning could be viewed as a logical extension of that zoning. The R-2A district allowed two-family dwellings on 30,000 square-foot lots or single-family homes on 20,000 square- foot lots. The applicant had indicated that he wished to subdivide the property into two single-family lots. . He went on to explain that while the current application did not include a request for subdivision, it was important to consider how the property could be developed under the proposed zoning. He also noted the applicant had not yet submitted a plan showing how the property could be divided, however, his request CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES September 6, 2005 Page 3 of7 . letter indicated the two future lots would contain 18,500 and 19,500 square feet of area. This was inconsistent with the survey of the property that showed a total area of 44,045 square feet. Director Nielsen then stated Staff had taken the liberty of considering two alternatives for division of the property. Both alternatives appeared to comply with the dimensional requirements of the R-2A district (minimum 100 feet of width, measured at the building line, and 120 feet of lot depth), and appeared to comply with the minimum lot area requirement of 20,000 square feet. He explained that the first alternative was more conforming, and should the concrete patio on the east side of the home be reduced in size, the property would comply with R-2A setback requirements. He further explained that the second alternative resulted in the garage being too close to the rear property line. Director Nielsen also explained a third alternative had been proposed by the applicant that included a "gerrymandered" lot line that was not typically utilized in subdivision situations. He concluded by stating that should the applicant demonstrate that the proposed lots can, in fact, be subdivided in compliance with R-2A standards without any variances, the request should be viewed favorably. Mark Kennedy, applicant, was present and explained there were several old mature trees on the lot that necessitated the "gerrymandered" lot line to be saved. He stated he preferred the second alternative, and noted the property could easily be split in two that would allow for single family residences on each one. Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:22 P.M. . Commissioner Gagne stated he would like to see the lot split with R-1A designation as he was concerned that the R1-C district was creeping into more residential neighborhoods. Director Nielsen stated that, from a planning standpoint, cities typically tried not to create a zoning change at a side property lot line, as it was typically better suited to the rear of the property. In response to Chair Bailey's question, Mr. Kennedy stated it was his intent to split the property to allow two single-family dwellings for the future. Commissioner Conley expressed discomfort with extending the R-2A district to the north as it would allow the district to "front" on Yellowstone, and if the R -1 C district allowed for the same single-family building pattern, then it seemed more compatible with the nearby zoning and area. Commissioner Woodruff stated he preferred the R-1C zoning designation in this case better than the R-2A. Commissioner Gniffke agreed. Chair Bailey stated he preferred the R-2A district designation as it provided more diversity in the City housing stock and he saw this as an opportunity to expand that district from current designations. He thought it did not seem to make the district "creep" as that district would distinctly end at Yellowstone Trail and it added diversity to the City. Mr. Kennedy requested clarification on the impact of the R-1C designation. Director Nielsen explained that under the R-2A designation, there could be two family dwellings that would accomplish the same goals. However, he would recommend two single-family houses as being in the best interests of both families in that area. This could be accomplished with an R-1C designation as well. . Gagne moved, Gniffke seconded, Recommending Modifying the Application to Recommend Rezoning the Property from R-1A to R-1 C. Motion passed 7/0. Chair Bailey closed the Public Hearing at 7:31 P.M. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES September 6, 2005 Page 4 of 7 . 3. 7:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING FROM c-3. GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO R-IC. SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL Applicant: City of Shorewood Location: 5745 Country Club Road (Badger Well site) Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 7:32 P.M. Director Nielsen explained that in May of this year, the City approved a Conditional Use Permit for a new well building for the Badger Well site, located next to the South Shore Senior Community Center. One of the conditions of that approval was that the property should be rezoned from its current C-3, General Commercial zoning to Rl-C, Single-Family Residential. He also noted that once the Council had approved an ordinance amending the zoning, the property would then be legally combined with the rest of the City property associated with Badger Field. Seeing no one present wishing to comment on this case, Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:34 P.M. Conley moved, Gagne seconded, Recommending Approval of the Request for Rezoning from c-3, General Commercial to R-Ic, Single-Family Residential. Motion passed 7/0. Chair Bailey closed the Public Hearing at 7:36 P.M. . 4. MINOR SUBDIVISION Applicant: Scott Henry Location: 24835 Yellowstone Trail Director Nielsen explained the applicant, Scott Henry, was the owner of the property located at 24835 Yellowstone Trail. Mr. Scott had requested approval of a minor subdivision, splitting the property into two lots. He went on to explain the property was zoned R-lC, Single-Family Residential and contained 54,779 square feet of area. It was occupied by Mr. Henry's home situated on the westerly half of the property. The proposed lots would be 21,464 square feet and 38,315 square feet (with the house) in area. Director Nielsen also explained the subject property was originally platted as Lot 3 and Lot 4, Block 1, Deerfield Addition. Many years ago the two lots were legally combined into a single parcel. This request for resubdivision of the lots into two building sites simply separated them back to their original configuration. Both of the proposed lots complied with the requirements of the R-lC zoning district. Both the existing home and the proposed home complied with R-IC setback requirements. Mr. Henry had provided hardcover calculations for the lot with the existing home on it. At 19.04 percent, this was well within the maximum allowed by Shorewood's Zoning Code. In addition, at staffs request, the applicant had provided legal descriptions for drainage and utility easements, 10 feet around each of the lots. Prior to City Council review of the request, the applicant should provide deeds for the required easements. In addition, City records indicated the property was only served with one sewer connection. However there was a manhole conveniently located in front of the property into which another connection can be made at such time as a new home was built on the property Director Nielsen recommended the minor division be approved subject to the following: . 1. The applicants must provide deeds for drainage and utility easements, 10 feet around each lot. . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES September 6, 2005 Page 5of7 2. The applicants must provide an up-to-date (within 30 days) title opinion for review by the City Attorney. 3. Prior to release of the resolution approving the request, the applicants must pay one park dedication fee ($2000) and one local sanitary sewer access charge ($1200). 4. Since the division itself does not result in the removal of any trees from the property, tree preservation and reforestation could be addressed at the time of application for building permits. Scott Henry, applicant, stated he would be happy to answer any questions the Commission had of him on this matter. Gniffke moved, Woodruff seconded, Recommending Approval of a Request for Minor Subdivision, subject to Staff Recommendations, for Scott Henry, 24835 Yellowstone Trail. Motion passed 7/0. 5. MINOR SUBDIVISION/COMBINATION (LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT) Applicants: Dan Ohland, Robert Gutierrez, and Chris Putnam Locations: 25070 Smithtown Rd. and 5615 & 5635 Fairway Drive Director Nielsen explained Dan and Keelo Ohland owned the property at 25070 Smithtown Road. The Ohlands proposed splitting off the northerly 236 feet of their property to sell it to Robert Guttierrez and Christopher Putnam, whose properties were located immediately to the west at 5615 Fairway Drive and 5635 Fairway Drive, respectively. The request was for a minor subdivision and combination to rearrange the lot lines between the respective parcels. All of the subject properties were zoned R-IC, Single-Family Residential, and were occupied by the owners' homes. In addition, the Ohland property had been occupied by his excavation business that was subject to discontinuance pursuant to an interim use agreement approved in 2002. Director Nielsen then explained the existing and proposed lot areas of the three parcels. He went on to explain the proposed division/combination complied with the requirements of the R-IC zoning district and appeared to benefit all three property owners. The Ohlands were able to dispose of relatively unusable land to the north of their house, while the Gutierrez and Putnam lots were increased in area, resulting in larger back yards for those two lots. He also stated the Ohland property had been occupied for years by an excavation business. In 2002, the City approved an interim use permit, allowing the Ohlands to make certain improvements to their nonconforming property, provided the business would be eliminated by 17 October of this year. As part of removing the business, a significant amount of driveway and parking area would be removed. This would bring the hardcover on the Ohland parcel to 32.9 percent, in compliance with zoning requirements. Director Nielsen complimented the neighbors on resolving this situation to provide amenable solutions for all and recommended that the division and combination be approved, subject to the following: 1. The applicants must provide drainage and utility easements 10 feet around each of the newly described parcels. These easements have been described for the Gutierrez and Putnam lots, but not for the Ohland parcel. It was worth noting that Gutierrez and Putnam may, at some future date; wish to request partial vacations ofthe existing easements on their lots. . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES September 6, 2005 Page 6 of7 2. The applicants must provide up-to-date (within 30 days) title opinions for review by the City Attorney. 3. Unless the portions of driveway and parking areas on the Ohland property could be removed prior to recording the division and combination, the applicants must submit a bid for completing the work, from which a letter of credit or cash escrow would be required (1.5 times the bid). This work should be completed by 1 November 2005. 4. Since no new lots were being created, there were no park dedication or local sanitary sewer access charges associated with the approval. 5. Items 1 and 2, above must be completed prior to the Council meeting at which the request was to be considered. Once approved by the Council, the applicants had thirty days to record the lot line rearrangement and new easements. Director Nielsen also stated the owners might want to request vacation of utility easements in the future as they were a bit wider than usual. He suggested the City Engineer be contacted to review this matter when the time was appropriate for the property owners. Dan Ohland, applicant, stated he had several requests. First, he requested the City waive the request for bids for Item 3 in the conditions stated, as he did this kind of work for a living. He also requested the City consider allowing him to tear down the old garage in front and rebuilding it in the rear of his property. He stated he would most likely be unable to determine a hardship for this request, however, the old garage was quite unsightly and the new garage would match the home and have a location that would be unobserved by other neighbors. He stated he would likely be bringing this request forward, but wished to provide background on the situation at this time. Relative to that request, he also stated he wished to provide a driveway to that new garage going through the lowland on his property off Fairway Drive. Chair Bailey thanked him for his comments; however, he noted they were separate issues from the request before the Commission at this time. The applicants and Commissioners requested various clarifications related to the request that Director Nielsen provided for them. White moved, Gagne seconded, Recommending Approval of a Request for a Minor Subdivision/Combination (Lot Line Rearrangement), subject to Staff Recommendations, for Dan Ohland, Robert Gutierrez, and Chris Putnam, 25070 Smithtown Rd. and 5615 & 5635 Fairway Drive. Motion passed 7/0. 6. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. 7. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen explained a discussion on signage issues would be slated for September 20, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting Agenda. He also noted there would not be a Study Session Meeting in October of this year. . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES September 6, 2005 Page 7 of7 8. REPORTS · Liaison to Council Recording Secretary Keefe reported on matters considered and actions taken at the August 22, 2005 Regular City Council Meeting (as detailed in the minutes ofthat meeting). · SLUC Chair Bailey stated the most recent Sensible Land Use Coalition Meeting regarding the Keelo case was quite interesting. No other information regarding the upcoming SLUC meeting was presented. · Other None. 9. ADJOURNMENT Gagne moved, Woodruff seconded, Adjourning the September 6, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting at 8:21 P.M. Motion passed 7/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. Sally Keefe Recording Secretary . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 2005 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chair Bailey called the meeting to order at 7:03 P.M. ROLLCALL Present: Chair Bailey; Commissioners Conley, Gagne, Gniffke, Meyer, White (arrived 7:05 P.M.) and Woodruff; and Planning Director Nielsen and Council Liaison Wellens Absent: None APPROVAL OF MINUTES · September 6, 2005 Gagne moved, Woodruff seconded, Approving the September 6, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes as presented. Motion passed 6/0. 1. DISCUSS SIGNAGE ISSUES Director Nielsen explained that for several months he had sought to provide clarity regarding signage issues within the City's ordinances as part of the Work Program for this year. To that end, the Commission had reviewed a slide presentation regarding different aspects of signage at the last Commission meeting. The purpose of the discussion this evening was to review several proposed sign code amendments. Director Nielsen then reviewed the proposed sign code amendments and rationale for each, specifically the definition of "sign area," and "sign-menu board." He also reviewed amendments related to permitted and prohibited signs, general provisions, non-conforming signs, and district regulations. With regard to permit issuance and application, Staff had proposed amendments that would allow permits to be issued administratively and submission requirements would be added to the sign application for thoroughness. Director Nielsen also suggested the Commission examine areas of the Comprehensive Plan that would support signage issues. He stated the character of the City was primarily residential and signage should support that use; however, it was also important to minimize signage throughout the City so the residential character of the City was allow to be reflected. 2. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. 3. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen stated there was a public hearing regarding a Conditional Use Permit for Accessory Space Over 1200 Square Feet, and a Minor Subdivision request slated for the October 4,2005, Planning Commission Meeting Agenda. He also noted there would not be a Study Session meeting in October. . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES September 20, 2005 Page 2 of2 4. REPORTS · Liaison to Council Commissioner Guiffke reported on matters considered and actions taken at the September 12,2005, Regular City Council Meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). · SLUC Director Nielsen announced the topic for the next meeting of the Sensible Land Use Coalition (SLUe) would be "Not Just a Stadium." Interested Commissioners were encouraged to submit registration forms promptly. · Other There was no other business presented this evening. 5. ADJOURNMENT Gagne moved, White seconded, Adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of September 20, 2005, at 8:27 P.M. Motion passed 7/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. Sally Keefe Recording Secretary . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, 4 OCTOBER 2005 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Acting Chair Gagne called the meeting to order at 7:03 P.M. ROLLCALL Present: Chair Bailey (arrived 7:09 P.M.); Commissioners Conley, Gagne, Gniffke, White (arrived 7:07 P.M.) and Woodruff; and Planning Director Nielsen and Council Liaison Wellens Absent: Commissioner Meyer APPROVAL OF MINUTES . 20 September 2005 Conley moved, Gniftke seconded, Approving the September 20, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting as presented. Motion passed 4/0. 1. 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - C.U.P. FOR ACCESSORY SPACE OVER 1200 SO.FT. Applicant: Mike Catain Location: 4550 Enchanted Point Acting Chair Gagne opened the Public Hearing at 7:04 P.M., noting the procedures utilized in a Public Hearing. He also noted any items recommended for approval at this meeting would appear on the October 24,2005, Regular City Council Meeting Agenda for further review and consideration. Director Nielsen explained the applicant had applied for a conditional use permit to construct accessory space in excess of 1200 square feet on the property located at 4550 Enchanted Point. Mr. Catain proposed building a detached, single-story garage on the west side of his property. Since the area of the garage, when added to existing accessory structures on the site, exceeded 1200 square feet, a C.U.P. was required. He went on to explain the property was zoned R-1C/S, Single-Family ResidentiallShoreland and contained 60,000 square feet of area. He also noted the location ofMr. Catain's house, which was currently undergoing a significant remodeling and addition project, and the proposed new garage. The garage was intended to replace a nonconforming boathouse/garage removed as part of the current construction project. The existing home had an attached garage containing 781 square feet of floor area, and the new detached garage would have 738 square feet of area, bringing the total area of accessory structures on the site to 1519 square feet. The existing home contained 5866 square feet of floor area above grade, between two levels. Elevations were noted, including the front elevation of the house that illustrated the architectural character and type of materials used for the home. In addition, Director Nielsen explained the property had an easement for a dry fire hydrant system that served Island residents. The turn-around on the north side of the garage was intended for fire fighting equipment. Mr. Catain was exploring the possibility of relocating the dry hydrant out to the public right-of- way of Enchanted Point, assuming costs were reasonable to do so. The relocation of neither the fire CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISION MEETING MINUTES October 4, 2005 Page 2 of6 . hydrant, nor the proposed garage would interfere with fire department access to the hydrant system. Chair Bailey assumed the leadership role of the meeting from Acting Chair Gagne at 7:08 P.M. Michael Catain, applicant, stated he had revised the proposal to include moving the proposed garage closer to the driveway near the drainpipe depicted in the site plan. He stated he would not be blocking anyone's view with this revised proposal and requested the Commission review the proposal with this change in mind this evening. Scott Brown, 4560 Enchanted Point, stated he understood the tradeoffs being made as part of this site; however, he asked that the proposed garage be redesigned to limit its height since the proposed structure would severely limit the lake view from his property. He also explained that since Mr. Catain had owned the property his view of the lake had been limited repeatedly in Mr. Catain's efforts to improve the property. He also noted concern for the fencing at the lake shore with regard to its appropriate setback requirements. He also stated he was concerned that the gate to the property remained locked at various times throughout the project. This was concerning because the fire hydrant was currently located within the gated portion of the Catain property and should there be a fire within the neighborhood, the hydrant could not be appropriately accessed. Dee McMasters, 4530 Enchanted Point, stated she had met with Mr. Catain recently to discuss the proposed garage. She stated she would lose over half of the lake view from her property should this garage be placed in its original location, noting she believed this action would hinder her from maximizing the full value of her property should she ever decide to sell it. She stated she appreciated Mr. Catain's efforts to work with her family to remedy the situation by moving the garage structure to the right of the driveway as he explained to the Commission this evening. . Mike Hayes, builder for Mr. Catain, stated he had staked the originally proposed location last week. Mr. Catain had considered the garage be moved to a different location at that time as he was aware that views to the lake would be blocked for his neighbors. With regard to the gate to the property, he stated, it was not locked but was simply held by a bungee cord during the construction phase on the property. Mr. Catain stated he was attempting to remedy issues of concern with his neighbors, however, he thought the garage needed to be built to scale with the rest of the buildings on site. He stated he had developed other properties previously and had attempted to do the right thing in each case. He stated he had a good working relationship with the Mound Fire Chief with regard to the location of the hydrant for this area. Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:21 P.M. Commissioner Woodruff stated he would like to see a revised plan that more accurately reflected the proposed location of the garage. Commissioners agreed. Chair Bailey stated it was important to understand that a resident could not own a view of the lake over someone else's property. Residents were allowed to make changes to property under their ownership, regardless of disruption of a view of the lake for others. He also noted the height of the building had been reduced and met the minimum height requirements specified by City ordinance. . Commissioner White suggested the relocation of the dry hydrant from its current location would be beneficial to all residents in the area. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISION MEETING MINUTES October 4, 2005 Page 3 of 6 . Conley moved, Gniftke seconded, Continuing this case to the November 1, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting. Motion passed 6/0. Chair Bailey closed the Public Hearing at 7:33 P.M. 2. MINOR SUBDIVISION Applicant: George Danser Location: 5840 Christmas Lake Road Director Nielsen explained Mr. George Danser, on behalf of his mother, Pamela Danser, proposed subdividing the property located at 5840 Christmas Lake Road. The subject property was located in the R- IAlS, Single-Family ResidentiallShoreland zoning district and contained 173,800 square feet of area (approximately four acres). The property was occupied by two single-family dwellings - the main house and a guest house. The site was also occupied by a fairly large wetland area, from which the land rose to the south and to the west. As proposed, the subdivision would result in one lot (with the house on it) containing 40,010 square feet of area, and a vacant lot with 133,790 square feet, approximately half of which was occupied by the wetland area. The property was subject to a private driveway easement that provided access to the house to the southwest. The owner also owned two small parcels on the other side of the street, abutting Christmas Lake. Director Nielsen stated the request included legally combining those parcels with the two new lots. . Director Nielsen then explained with regard to the analysis of the case, that the R-IA1S zoning district required lots to be at least 40,000 square feet in area, 120 feet wide at the building line, and at least 120 feet deep. Both lots would comply with the setbacks of the R-IA1S district. Despite the existing wetland, the new lot had ample buildable area at the west end of the property. To minimize altering the wetland area to accommodate a driveway for the new property, the new lot would need to share a common driveway with the existing home. The new driveway would then extend over to the south side of the property where it would extend west to the buildable portion of the property. He noted there were several issues that required address in this request. 1. Christmas Lake Road was substandard in width (33 feet vs. 50 feet required). Any approval of the division/combination should require dedication of an additional 17 feet of right-of-way. The applicant's surveyor should provide a legal description for the r.o.w. and his attorney should incorporate the description into a deed to the City. 2. The r.o.w. referenced above would necessitate moving the rear lot line of Parcel B 17 feet, in order to maintain 40,000 square feet of area. 3. The applicant's surveyor should provide legal descriptions for the wetland area and the required 35-foot buffer area. The applicant's attorney should incorporate the legal descriptions into drainage and conservation easement deeds to the City. The buffer must be staked with wetland monuments. Proposed staking should be shown on the survey. . 4. The applicant's surveyor should provide legal descriptions for the drainage and utility easements (10 feet around each of the lots). From these descriptions the applicant's attorney should prepare easement deeds to the City. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISION MEETING MINUTES October 4, 2005 Page 4 of 6 . 5. The driveway easement across Parcel B, in favor of Parcel A, was incomplete and too narrow. Due to the distance from the street to the buildable portion of Parcel A, a fire access road was required, pursuant to the State Fire Code. This required a 20-foot wide paved surface. Allowing a very minimal five feet on each side of the driveway for snow storage, the easement should be 30 feet wide. The applicant's attorney should also provide an easement and maintenance agreement for the shared portion of the driveway. 6. The applicant must submit a grading plan for the new driveway. While it was assumed the amount of fill necessary to accommodate the driveway would be minimal, it would require review and approval by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. 7. The two parcels on the east side of the road should be split more evenly, in order to provide adequate room for a dock on Parcel C. It should be made large enough so that a dock can be located in front of Parcel A. The combination of Parcels C and D with Parcels A and B, respectively, was subject to approval by Hennepin County. 8. It may be necessary for the applicant to obtain consent for the conservation easement that coincides with the existing driveway easement from the adjoining property owner. This issue has been referred to the City Attorney for his recommendation. . 9. The existing nonconforming guest house must be relocated (or removed) on the site and converted to accessory space. It should be noted that items 2. and 5., above, will necessitate a slightly different location for the structure. If this will not be resolved prior to recording a resolution for the division/combination, a letter of credit or cash escrow for one and one-half times the amount of the work must be provided by the applicant. The applicant must provide bids for this work in order to determine the amount of the letter of credit. 10. The proposed subdivision did not require the removal of any trees. Any tree removal necessary for the construction of a house on the new lot could be addressed with the building permit for that lot. 11. The applicant must provide an up-to-date (within 30 days) title opinion or title commitment for review by the City Attorney. 12. Prior to release of the resolution approving the subdivision, the applicant must pay a park dedication fee ($2000), and a local sanitary sewer connection charge ($1200) for the new lot. Credit was given for the lot with the existing home on it. 13. Once the applicant had received the Council resolution approving the subdivision, he must record it with Hennepin County within 30 days or the approval is void. Director Nielsen stated often times it was recommended that a division/combination be approved subject to the attached conditions. In this instance, there were enough issues to be resolved that Director Nielsen suggested that the application be continued, pending completion of the required items. . George Danser, applicant, stated this was an opportunity for his family to subdivide the property. His mother had owned the property since 1975 and his grandmother before her since 1941. He noted his mother's current health situation and the purpose for the request. Mr. Danser suggested the easement be paved, widened and accessible as a fire lane. He noted other lots would then have future access as the current owner had access rights. He also stated it would mitigate additional access off Christmas Lake Road. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISION MEETING MINUTES October 4, 2005 Page 5of6 . Bruce Benson, 5820 Christmas Lake Road, stated he had lived on his property his entire life, and while he had no problem with the proposed request, he would like the idea of having an owner live on the site. He stated he was concerned about the wetland in that area as it acted as a drainage basin for an extensive area. He also stated he did not want to see the wetland blocked in any way. He also noted the two to three lots to the north of this property were landlocked. He believed controlling the road access points to be a safe and good idea. He also thought the drainage from the north and south into and out of the wetland area needed to be addressed as well. Eric Danser, brother of the applicant, stated he was concerned about the request regarding Lot C in this case. It had been forty feet in length since 1941 and a dock had always been in place there. With regard to the easement issue, he stated there would be a maximum of three owners utilizing one driveway in this case. Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:56 P.M. Commissioner White stated she agreed with the suggestion to retain the driveway location on the easement. Director Nielsen stated the applicants were trying to avoid putting in a City street, however, there would be five homes served by the driveway and that necessitated a City Street in this matter. Discussion ensued about the driveway issue and several Commissioners agreed with Director Nielsen's recommendation to continue the case. Conley moved, Gagne seconded, Continuing this case to November 1,2005, Planning Commission . Meeting Agenda. Motion passed 6/0. 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR Commissioner Woodruff explained the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) had notified residents of Enchanted Island that a multiple dock license had been requested for the property located at 4320 Enchanted Drive. A Public Hearing on this issue had been scheduled for October 12,2005. Commissioner Woodruff requested the Commission consider discussing City ordinances related to the definition of dock and whether the City wished to be more restrictive than the LMCD in its ordinances. 4. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen stated the two items continued from this meeting this evening, as well as Public Hearings on sign regulations and other applications, were slated for the November 1,2005, Planning Commission Meeting Agenda. He reminded the Commission there would be no Planning Commission Meeting on October 18,2005. Commissioner Woodruff stated he would be unable to attend the November 1, 2005, Planning Commission meeting. 5. REPORTS · Liaison to Council . Commissioner Gniftke reported on matters considered and actions taken at the September 26,2005, Regular City Council Meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISION MEETING MINUTES October 4, 2005 Page 6 of6 · SLUC No report was given for the Sensible Land Use Coalition (SLUe) meeting. · Other None. 6. ADJOURN Gagne moved, White seconded, Adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of October 4, 2005. Motion passed 6/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. Sally Keefe Recording Secretary . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, 1 NOVEMBER 2005 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chair Bailey called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. Present: Chair Bailey; Commissioners Conley (arrived 7:03 P.M.), Gagne, Gniffke, Meyer and White; Planning Director Nielsen and Council Liaison Wellens Absent: Commissioner Woodruff APPROVAL OF MINUTES · 4 October 2005 Gagne moved, Gniftke seconded, Approving the October 4, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes as amended on Page 2, Item 1, Paragraph 4, Sentence 2, change "his efforts" to "Mr. Catain's efforts" and in the next sentence of that same item and paragraph, omit the "ed" from "concerned." Motion passed 4/0/1, Meyer abstaining due to his absence at that meeting. 1. PUBLIC HEARING - C.U.P. FOR ACCESSORY SPACE OVER 1200 SO.FT. Applicant: Mike Catain Location: 4550 Enchanted Point Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 7:02 P.M., noting the procedures utilized in the Public Hearing process. In addition, he stated any items recommended for approval this evening would be placed on the November 28,2005, Regular City Council Meeting Agenda for further consideration. Commissioner Conley arrived at 7:03 P.M. Director Nielsen explained that this case was continued from the October Planning Commission Meeting pending the applicant's submission of a revised site plan for the project. Director Nielsen then briefly reviewed the revised site plan noting the garage had been shifted approximately 20 feet to the south to address neighborhood concerns regarding sight lines to the lake. Director Nielsen went on to state that recommendations from the October meeting still remained for this case, however, he recommended approval of this case with those Staff recommendations included. He also stated no additional landscaping was necessary. Michael Catain, applicant, stated he had met the guidelines outlined in the City ordinances, and he was trying to work the neighbors as best he could. He stated the view was best he could manage to work with on the site as proposed. In response to a question by John McMasters, 4530 Enchanted Point, Director Nielsen clarified the setback requirements and criteria necessary for a Conditional Use Permit. He noted all criteria had been met in this case. Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:10 P.M. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES November 1,2005 Page 2 of 8 . There were no questions from the Planning Commission on this case. White moved, Meyer seconded, Approving the Conditional Use Permit for Accessory Space Over 1200 Square Feet for Mike Catain, 4550 Enchanted Point. Motion passed 6/0. Chair Bailey closed the Public Hearing at 7: lOP .M. 2. MINOR SUBDIVISION Applicant: George Danser Location: 5840 Christmas Lake Road Director Nielsen explained this item had been continued from the October Planning Commission Meeting pending the applicant resolving numerous issues raised by City Staff. He noted the applicant had not submitted revised plans to date. In addition, he went on to explain, the property owner to the south had disputed the common property boundary between his and the Danser property. In a letter dated 7 October, the neighbor provided information indicating that the property line might be 12 feet further to the north than that shown by the Dansers' surveyor. Director Nielsen stated if the line must be adjusted, the southerly lot on the Danser property could still be made to comply with zoning requirements. It would, however require the rear lot line to be moved further to the west in order to maintain 40,000 square feet of area. He also noted this action was necessary anyway, due to the requirement of additional road right-of-way for Christmas Lake Road. Director Nielsen went on to explain there were procedures for settling property line disputes, through neighborly discussion or through the legal system. . George Danser, applicant, stated he had discussed the issue of the property line with his mother, the owner of the property, and would make every effort to work with the neighbor to resolve the dispute. He noted a letter of description of events regarding the property line had been submitted to Staff for further clarification. He still remained concerned for the necessity of Lot C being combined with other proposed lots as the current configuration had proven successful historically for his family. In addition, he stated he had removed the dock on the lot as requested by the City. He stated several issues had been addressed and he was concerned that Staffhad the opinion that nothing had been resolved in this case in the past month as he believed the opposite was true. He requested the Commission consider the hardship of the owner's current health care issues and work to move the request forward expeditiously. After a brief discussion of the Commission and clarification of issues with Mr. Danser, Mr. Danser stated he would need to speak with members of his family about the remaining issues of concern. Gagne moved, Conley seconded, Continuing the case to the November 15, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting. Motion passed 6/0. 3. 7:15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - C.U.P. FOR FILL IN EXCESS OF 100 CU. YDS. Applicant: Mark Guidinger Location: 19735 Muirfield Circle Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 7:43 P.M. . Director Nielsen explained the history of the case, noting Mark Guidinger was the owner of the property at 19735 Muirfield Circle. Mr. Guidinger proposed building a swimming pool in his rear yard that would necessitate up to 400 cubic yards offill to create a level area for the pool. Because Shorewood's zoning regulations required a conditional use permit for fill in excess of 100 cubic yards, Mr. Guidinger had CITY OF SHORE WOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES November 1, 2005 Page 3 of 8 . submitted a request for such a conditional use permit. Director Nielsen then noted the location of the pool and retaining wall system as proposed on the lot. He also reviewed a cross-section drawing illustrating how the retaining walls, pool and house related to the existing grade. The fill material would be confined by two boulder retaining walls, four to six feet in height, terraced with a four-foot wide landscaped area between the walls. The lower of the two walls was approximately 50 feet from the rear property line. The applicant's engineer has provided a written plan to the City regarding construction of the retaining walls for the project. In addition, Director Nielsen explained the property was zoned P.U.D., Planned Unit Development (Single- Family), and contained approximately 26,361 square feet of area. The lot was characterized by a significant drop in elevation at the rear of the existing home. While the area immediately behind the home was relatively open, the southeasterly portion of the lot was quite heavily wooded. With regard to the issues of analysis for this case, Director Nielsen stated Shorewood's Zoning Code required a conditional use permit whenever more than 100 cubic yards of material was brought on to a site. This equated to approximately 10 dump truck loads of dirt. Issues associated with these types of request were typically engineering related. Consequently, the plans were forwarded to the City's engineering consultant, WSB & Associates. Steve Gurney had reviewed the plans relative to grading, drainage and the structural aspect of the proposed retaining walls, and his recommendations were included in his report, dated 26 October 2005. . With regard to issues of grading and drainage, the specifics were detailed in Mr. Gurney's report, however, the main issue was the effect of the grading and filling on the existing trees on the site. The applicant proposed to maintain significant tree cover in the rear 50 feet of the property. Director Nielsen also stated the Pollution Control Agency recommended that pool drainage be conducted to the sanitary sewer system unless the pool water had not been treated for at least seven days. While it was fairly common practice to drain pools to streets and ultimately into the storm system, this should not be allowed for any pool that has been treated within the last seven days. Director Nielsen explained the City had received correspondence from a concerned property owner to the east of the proposed project regarding this case. Director Nielsen stated any approval of the conditional use permit should be subject to the recommendations of the City's Consulting Engineer. He noted the applicant was present this evening, as well as the applicant's landscape contractor. Mr. Guidinger stated he had submitted a landscape design for the project, as requested by Staff, noting the design firm contracted for the project had worked with the engineering recommendations for the site as well. He noted in providing a level area for the pool, it would drain appropriately. He stated the pool drainage would most likely drain to the storm sewer at the end of the driveway. Ron Johnson, 5355 Shady Hills Circle, stated he objected to this request, and stated the City Planning Director had no knowledge of farm drainage or support of crops. He stated this public hearing was one in a series of public hearings regarding public water being dropped on to his property. He then summarized the history of his objection to this case. He stated the City had to offer him compensation for dropping public water on to his property. Hans Free, applicant's landscape contractor, stated he was working with the engineering recommendations regarding drainage for the site. e Mr. Johnson stated there were several instances were the City had not fixed the problem of allowing water to enter his property. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES November 1,2005 Page 4 of 8 . Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:57 P.M. Director Nielsen stated, with regard to the pool drainage, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency recommended the pool discharge not be directed to wetland areas, preferring instead that the discharge be directed to sanitary sewer systems if chemically treated. He stated most homeowners, in his experience, ran a drainage line to the storm sewer or to a yard area. These practices would work acceptably as long as homeowners did not treat the pool with chemicals for seven days prior to drainage into the storm sewer or yard. Commissioner Gagne questioned whether Mr. Guidinger had met the necessary approvals as outlined in City ordinances associated with a request such as this one. Director Nielsen stated the Engineering and Planning Departments had recommended approval of this project. In response to a question by Council Liaison Wellens, Mr. Johnson demonstrated the location of his land on a site location map associated with the pool project being requested. Mr. Johnson went on to state drain tiles had been placed in that area that would outlet onto his property. Conley moved, Gagne seconded, Recommending Approval of a Conditional Use Permit for Mark Guidinger, 19735 Muirfield Circle, subject to City Engineering recommendations. Chair Bailey stated he believed the issue at hand was not to solve Mr. Johnson's drainage issue, but to allow Mr. Guidinger to develop his property. . Commissioner Conley stated he agreed, and with all due respect to Mr. Johnson, the issues presented by Mr. Johnson were large scale issues. He further stated he was not convinced that the quantity of water drained from a pool once a year would contribute in a meaningful way to the larger engineering issues. He also stated he thought a property owner had a right to develop his own property. Motion passed 6/0. Chair Bailey closed the Public Hearing at 8:08 P.M. 4. 7:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY PLAT - APPLE RIDGE 3RD ADDN. Applicant: Lecy Construction, Inc. Location: Outlots A and B of Apple Ridge 2nd Addn (Apple Road) Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 8: 15 P.M. Director Nielsen explained in 2002, Lecy Construction, Inc. was granted approval for Apple Ridge 2nd Addition, a four-lot, residential subdivision located on the east side of Apple Road, just north of the Shorewood/Chanhassen border. The project was processed as a planned unit development that allowed the developer to cluster the four new lots and included a conservation easement over the easterly 56,916 square feet (1.31 acres) of the site. The easement, originally platted as Outlot A, was in favor of the City of Shorewood. A second outlot, Outlot B, was to be conveyed to the property owner to the north. This conveyance never occurred due to that property owner's legal difficulties. . Lecy Construction now proposed replatting the two outlots into four outlots in order to convey them to adjoining property owners. In their letter, dated 4 October 2005, the applicants explained the properties would be resubdivided into four outlots, and how the outlots would be conveyed. This public hearing was held for the purpose of considering a preliminary plat for the property. . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES November 1, 2005 Page 5 of8 Director Nielsen went on to explain this request was somewhat unusual, primarily for the resulting lot configurations proposed by the applicant. He stated it must be noted that Outlots A-C would still be subject to the original conservation easement. Only the ownership would be changed. As explained in the applicant's letter, Outlot D would be the same size as the original Outlot B, with proposed ownership undetermined at this time. Since the proposed plat did not result in additional building lots, the principal concern with this "replat" was making sure that all of the prospective land owners were fully aware that Outlots A-C was subject to the conservation easement. In this regard, the resolution approving a final plat should clearly inform future owners of the existence of the easement. Approval of the preliminary plat should also be subject to the following: 1. The developer should submit a protective covenant stating that Outlot A would not be sold separately from its adjoining property. This property was located in Chanhassen and can not be legally combined in another way. The applicant's attorney should submit the covenant before the final plat was scheduled for Council review and approval. 2. Outlot B should be legally combined with Lot 3, Apple Ridge 2nd Addition and recorded with the final plat for the Third Addition. 3. Outlot C should be legally combined with Lot 2, Apple Ridge 2nd Addition and recorded with the final plat for the Third Addition. Outlot C and Lot 2 were both owned by Lecy Construction, so there should be no delay. 4. The legal status of the property owner to the north of Outlot D was unknown as of this writing. If Outlot D can not be conveyed within one year, the outlot should be legally combined with Lot 2. This outlot would be of no benefit to the property owner to the east of Apple Ridge. 5. The applicant must provide evidence of recording for items 1-3 within 30 days of Council approval, or the approval would be void. Director Nielsen noted a representative of Lecy Construction was present this evening. Andy Johnsrud, of Lecy Construction Inc., stated the recommendations were acceptable as presented by Director Nielsen. He stated the only possible problem that could be foreseen related to Item 4 of the recommendations. Seeing no one present wishing to comment on this case, Chair Bailey opened and closed the Public Hearing at 8:21 P.M. Discussion ensued by the Commission regarding the best possible method and timeline necessary for working with the conveyance of Outlot D. White moved, Gagne seconded, Recommending Approval of a Preliminary Plat for Apple Ridge, 3rd Addition, subject to Staff Recommendations 1-3 and 5, and that Outlot D would be legally combined with Lot 2 by March 1, 2005, as detailed in the Staff Memorandum from Director Nielsen regarding this case, dated October 30, 2005. Motion passed 6/0. Chair Bailey closed the Public Hearing at 8:30 P.M. . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES November 1, 2005 Page 6 of8 5. MINOR SUBDIVISION Applicant: Ann Meldahl Location: 6180 Cathcart Drive This item had been removed from the agenda for this meeting at the request of the applicant. 6. MINOR SUBDIVISIONS Applicant: Timothy Anderson Location: 20520 and 20540 Excelsior Boulevard Director Nielsen explained 10Spring, Inc., representing Timothy Anderson, had requested approval of a minor subdivision of the two lots located at 20520 and 20540 Excelsior Boulevard. The easterly lot (20520) lot was currently occupied by a single-family dwelling. The westerly lot was vacant. Pursuant to Section 1201.03 Subd.16 of the Shorewood Zoning Ordinance, the applicant proposed dividing the lots in order to build two, two-family dwellings that are subdivided for individual ownership. He went on to explain the subject properties were located in the R-2A, Single and Two-Family Residential Zoning District. The easterly lot contained 30,687 square feet of area. The existing home and detached garage would be demolished and replaced with a new two-family dwelling. The westerly lot contained 30,507 square feet. All four of the proposed unit lots would exceed 15,000 square feet. With regard to analysis for the case, Director Nielsen explained that although the existing lots were platted prior to Shorewood having any provision in its zoning ordinance for dividing lots with two-family dwellings on them, both of the base lots met the minimum 30,000 square-foot requirement. Similarly, the four new unit lots all met the minimum area requirement of 15,000 square feet. Based upon the provisions of the Shorewood Zoning Code, the request was consistent with Shorewood's zoning regulations and Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommended that the divisions be approved subject to the following: 1. The applicant must provide a maintenance agreement, suitable for recording, addressing how future owners would agree on the upkeep of the property. 2. The unit lots would all require separate City utilities. It should be noted that City water was available to the subject properties but not required. 3. The divisions and maintenance agreements must be recorded within 30 days ofthe applicant receiving a certified copy of the Council resolutions approving the divisions. 4. Prior to release of the resolutions, the applicant must pay park dedication fees for the new lots ($2000 x 3 = $6000). Credit was allowed for the lot with the existing house on it. 5. Prior to release of the resolutions, the applicant must pay local sanitary sewer access charges for the new lots ($1200 x 3 = $3600). Credit was allowed for the lot with the existing house on it. Director Nielsen stated representatives were present for this case this evening. Jamie Rosen, of 10Spring Inc., stated he would be happy to answer any questions the Commission might have of him regarding this case. Various Commissioners requested clarification on the common area and proposed driveways for the project. . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES November 1,2005 Page 7of8 Gniffke moved, Conley seconded, Recommending Approval of the Request for Minor Subdivision for Timothy Anderson, 20520 and 20540 Excelsior Boulevard. Motion passed 6/0. 7. 8:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING CODE AMENDMENT REGARDING SIGN REGULATIONS Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 8:38 P.M. Director Nielsen explained the Commission had reviewed draft language regarding sign regulations for the City's Zoning Code at its September 20, 2005, Study Session Meeting. He then reviewed the proposed changes to the zoning code as a result of discussions held at that meeting. He noted changes to menu board, signage, general provisions, non-conforming signage, zoning district regulations, and permit issuance and application issues. Seeing no one present wishing to comment on this matter, Chair Bailey closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 8 :46 P.M. Discussion ensued regarding the necessity of exempting barber poles from the code. Gagne moved, Recommending allowing the current ordinance provisions regarding moving barber poles be retained as currently stated. Motion failed for lack of a second. Discussion ensued regarding other various issues requiring clarification with the proposed ordinance changes. Gagne moved, Gniffke seconded, Continuing this item to the November 15, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting Agenda. Motion passed 6/0. 8. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. 9. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen stated there would be a Joint Meeting of the Planning Commission and City Council as well as the two items from this meeting continued to the next meeting of the Planning Commission slated for the November 15,2005, Planning Commission Meeting. Commissioner White stated she would not be present at that meeting. 10. REPORTS · Liaison to Council Director Nielsen reported on matters considered and actions taken at the October 26,2005, Regular City Council Meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES November 1, 2005 Page 8 of8 · SLUC No report given. · Other None. 11. ADJOURNMENT White moved, Gagne seconded, Adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of November 1, 2005. Motion passed 6/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. Sally Keefe Recording Secretary . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 2005 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chair Bailey called the meeting to order at 7:02 P.M. ROLLCALL Present: Chair Bailey; Commissioners Conley, Gagne, Gniffke, Meyer, and Woodruff; and Planning Director Nielsen and Council Liaison Wellens Absent: Commissioner White APPROVAL OF MINUTES · November 1, 2005 Gagne moved, Gniftke seconded, Approving the November 1, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes as presented. Motion passed 5/0/1, with Woodruff abstaining due to absence at that meeting. Without objection from the Commission, Director Nielsen requested Item 4 be moved to the first item on the Agenda for this meeting. 1. MINOR SUBDIVISION Applicant: George Danser Location: 5840 Christmas Lake Road Director Nielsen stated this item had been requested to be continued to the December 6, 2005, Planning Commission Agenda, at the request of the applicant. Gagne moved, Conley seconded, Continuing this item to the December 6, 2005, Planning Commission Meeting Agenda. Motion passed 5/0. 2. JOINT WORK SESSION WITH CITY COUNCIL RE: COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT - PLANNING DISTRICT 6 Chair Bailey welcomed the Council, including Mayor Love, Councilmembers Lizee and Turgeon, as well as Administrator Dawson, to this meeting of the Planning Commission and thanked them for engaging in dialogue regarding Planning District 6 this evening. Director Nielsen explained the Planning Commission had met in July to discuss the potential plans for Planning District 6 in the City after several inquiries were made regarding possible redevelopment plans for the area. He discussed the elements of the Comprehensive Plan that were pertinent to the District, particularly those related to the Shorewood Yacht Club property and its wetland area. He also reviewed the zoning designations per property on the Zoning Map within the District. Director Nielsen stated the District was zoned originally with use in mind, such as the C-4 zoning associated with the Minnetonka Dredging site. . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES November 15, 2005 Page 2 of 4 Director Nielsen went on to review the issues of concern associated with the Shorewood Yacht Club site with regard to redevelopment. He also reviewed the remainder ofthe properties within the District with regard to density and possible changes in land use as a result of redevelopment. Mayor Love stated his biggest concern was always that of intensive use for an area. In this case, he believed it should be the least intensive use as there were many issues to consider in thinking about the area as a whole. He stated there were adjacent residential neighborhoods that would be forced to undergo transitions with an intensive use that he did not believe necessary in this area. Discussion ensued by the group with regard to intensity of residential uses allowable for the area. Various Commissioners stated the area seemed suitable for an R-2A, Single and Two-Family Residential and noted traffic concerns for the area associated with Planning District 6. Discussion followed regarding style of buildings to be utilized should an office building be part of Planning District 6. Commissioner Gagne expressed preference for a low "condominium" style building versus a storied office building for this area in effort to continue the character of the residential neighborhoods nearby. Additional discussion followed regarding the benefits of the C-4 zoning designation for sites within the District versus additional R-2A and R-IA residential housing. Director Nielsen stated he would provide the Commission with a summary of issues presented this evening and also a draft text of description of Planning District 6 for additional review. Chair Bailey questioned the Council regarding potential issues of study for the upcoming year. Issues of study suggested included examination of the dock ordinance within the City and historic preservation Issues. Chair Bailey thanked the Council for working with the Planning Commission on this item this evening and stated, on behalf of the Commission, that all parties present appreciated the time spent in discussion to better provide direction for the future. 3. PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING CODE AMENDMENT REGARDING SIGN REGULATIONS Chair Bailey opened the Public Hearing at 8:07 P.M. Director Nielsen explained the Commission had been working with the City's Zoning Code in recent months regarding regulation of signage in the City. Several proposals had been reviewed and suggested for change. Director Nielsen then noted several potential changes to the signage regulations including changes to menu board signage, general provisions, non-conforming signage, zoning district regulations, and permit issuance and application issues. Commissioner Woodruff expressed concern for the wording of the ordinance as it appeared flags of other nations were not allowed as part of this ordinance. Discussion ensued by the Commission on this matter. Seeing no one present wishing to speak on this topic, Chair Bailey opened and closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 8:24 P.M. . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES November 15, 2005 Page 3 of 4 Woodruff moved, Gagne seconded, Recommending the Sign Regnlations associated with Section 1201.03, Subd. 1l.c.(10). of the City Zoning Code regarding signage state "There shall be no more than one United States Flag and no more than three other non-commercial flags..." Motion passed 6/0. Without objection from the maker of the motion, the seconder of the motion amended the motion to include all other sign regulations would be subject to revisions made at previous meetings on this topic and would be included as part of the motion associated with changes to the Zoning Code regulations on sign age. Motion passed 6/0. Chair Bailey closed the Public Hearing at 8:40 P.M. 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR This item was heard before Item 1 on the Agenda. Gabriel Jabbour, 985 Tonkawa Road, Orono, and Mike Malone, resident of Excelsior, were present and wished to address the Commission. Mr. Jabbour stated he had lived in the Lake Minnetonka area for 35 years and currently owned three boat marinas, a photo business, and a boat manufacturing company. He stated he had recently purchased the Shorewood Yacht Club with Mr. Malone as his partner in that business. He stated he wished to understand the City's intention for the land and Planning district on which the parcel was located, and to work with the City to be a good corporate neighbor regarding the property. Mr. Malone stated he had grown up in the area, and his father was a founding member of the Wayzata Yacht Club. He stated he had recently retired from his job at Northwest Airlines and he lived four blocks from the Yacht Club. He went on to state his family was a partner in the ownership of Maynard's Restaurant in Excelsior, he was a member of the Excelsior Planning Commission and a representative of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District. He stated ownership of the marina allowed him to participate in his dreamjob, and he saw this as an opportunity to work with the City. In response to Chair Bailey's question, Mr. Jabbour stated the primary purpose of the new owners of the Yacht Club was to be financially lucrative. Mr. Malone stated there were many opportunities to improve the Yacht Club, its functionality, and marketability. He stated he wanted to continue good relationships within the area and expand the enthusiasm associated with the Yacht Club. He stated he understood the parcel was clearly to be utilized as a yacht club and he was uncertain as to what other purposes the properties could respond to at this time. Chair Bailey stated, on behalf of the City, that the City looked forward to working with the new owners and wished them the best of luck. 5. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen stated there would be four items slated for the December 6, 2005, meeting of the Planning Commission including two Minor Subdivisions, and two items related to amending the Zoning Code regarding conditional uses and impervious surface allowance for certain districts within the City. . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES November 15, 2005 Page 4 of 4 6. REPORTS · Liaison to Council Commissioner Gagne reported on matters considered and actions taken at the November 14, 2005, Regular City Council Meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). · SLUC No report was given. · Other Chair Bailey thanked Recording Secretary Keefe for her years of service with the Planning Commission and stated she would be missed. Recording Secretary Keefe thanked Chair Bailey and the Commission for its kind words and continued support through the past years. She stated she would miss working with the Commission and City Staff a great deal, and wished all parties present the very best of luck in the future. Following the tradition of allowing the person departing the Commission to adjourn the meeting, Chair Bailey requested Recording Secretary Keefe continue the honor of adjournment. 7. ADJOURNMENT Keefe moved, Gagne seconded, Adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of November 15, 2005, at 8:51 P.M. Motion passed 6/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. Sally Keefe Recording Secretary . . - CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, 6 DECEMBER 2005 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Acting Chair Gagne called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. Present: Acting Chair Gagne; Commissioners Gniffke, Meyer, White, and Woodruff; Planning Director Nielsen and Council Liaison Wellens Absent: Chair Bailey, Commissioner Conley APPROVAL OF MINUTES · 1 November 2005 Meyer moved, Gniffke seconded, Approving the November 1,2005, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes as presented. Motion passed 4/0/1, White abstaining due to her absence at that meeting. 1. PUBLIC HEARING - TEXT AMMENDMENT TO ALLOW GENERAL TRADE CONTRACTOR'S SHOPS IN THE C-3. GENERAL-COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT BY CONDITIONAL USE Applicant: Lynne Fisher Location: 24285 Smithtown Road Acting Chair Gagne opened the Public Hearing at 7:02 P.M., noting the procedures utilized in the Public Hearing process. In addition, he stated any items recommended for approval this evening would be placed on the December 12, 2005, Regular City Council Meeting Agenda for further consideration. Director Nielsen explained the history of this case, noting Lynne Fisher and her husband Steve are the owners of SJ Fisher Construction Co., currently located in Tonka Bay. They had arranged to purchase the property at 24285 Smithtown to relocate their business. The property is zoned C-3, General Commercial, which presently does not provide for trade contractor's shops as either permitted or conditional uses. The Fishers had requested an amendment to the Code that would allow such use in the C-3 District. Director Nielsen went on to explain the subject property is approximately 85 feet wide and contains 18,199 square feet of area. It is currently nonconforming with respect to setbacks and due to the presence of a pole type accessory structure. The applicants propose to completely redevelop the front portion of the site. The rear portion of the property was occupied by a telecommunications monopole and small equipment building. He reviewed land uses and zoning surrounding the site. The Fishers' had requested the classification of "building trade contractor's shop" which is currently allowed as a conditional use permit in the C-4, Service Commercial zoning district, be allowed by conditional use permit in the C-3 District. Director Nielsen clarified the request being considered at this time had to do with the use of the property and what was acceptable in the C-3 District as a whole. He stated C-4 Districts are fairly limited in Shorewood. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING December 6, 2005 Page 2 of 10 . Director Nielsen stated if the Planning Commission agreed with amending the C-3 District regulations, Staff recommended taking the language currently in the C-4 District regulations which provided for this by conditional use, not as a permitted use, thereby requiring the Fishers to go through a public hearing specifically for this site. With regard to issues ofland use, Director Nielsen stated the front portion of the proposed building would house the applicants' offices. Offices are already allowed in the C-3 District. As indicated in the applicants' request letter, most of their activities take place on construction sites. Their employees typically do not come to the office location; they go directly to job sites. This being the case, the traffic generated by the proposed activity may be less than other allowable uses in the C-3 District. The rear (and larger) portion of the proposed building will be used as storage and some incidental assembly of mechanical ductwork. Director Nielsen stated the most significant concern with the use being proposed had to do with the element of outdoor storage of vehicles, equipment and construction materials. The applicants' illustration plans do not provide for such storage, nor is there space at the rear of the site to accommodate it after the required setback. The provisions of Section 1201.23 Subd. 4.e. (Service Commercial- conditional uses) attempt to address this issue by requiring screening and landscaping from the street and residential properties, and by limiting the amount of storage area to 30 percent of the lot area and no more than the area of the building. . Director Nielsen stated Staff recommended the Planning Commission and City Council consider the purpose of the C-3 District - "... to provide for the establishment of commercial and service activities which draw from and serve customers from the entire community or subregion." when evaluating this request. Staff also recommended the Planning Commission and City Council consider the types of uses already allowed in the C-3 District. The applicants' request letter made some comparisons to existing C-3 businesses. Director Nielsen explained if the Planning Commission and City Council approve amending C-3 District regulations, the applicants would then apply for a conditional use permit and submit the necessary detailed plans. With regard to issues with site and building plans, Director Nielsen stated there were not enough parking spaces for the proposed building (which could require a smaller building to be built); the proposed parking design did not comply with Shorewood's parking regulations (the drive aisle and parking spaces as shown were too narrow); and additional perimeter concrete curbing is needed around the parking areas and driveways. He went on to state proposed landscaping should be consistent with the recommendations of the County Road 19 Corridor Study and must be prepared by a registered landscape architect, the site plan must address site lighting and trash facilities, and the property may be required to provide some sort of ponding to accommodate storm water runoff. He stated, the applicants must provide an "as-built" survey of the site showing existing site improvements, and the plans submitted must be to a workable scale. In summary, Director Nielsen stated the first decision for the Planning Commission is that of land use, is the proposed land use request acceptable for this C-3 District? . Seeing no one present wishing to speak on this topic, Acting Chair Gagne opened and closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public hearing at 7: 15 P.M. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING December 6, 2005 Page 3 of 10 . Commissioner Gniffke stated the Planning Commission had recently reviewed and discussed the possible permitted uses of C-3 Districts. He stated he would not support the equivalent of a C-4 District conditional use permit in a C-3 District. Commissioner Woodruff concurred with Commissioner Gniffke. He also stated if the request were for a C-4 C.U.P., the proposed parking would have to be revised to conform to C-4 C.U.P. requirements. Commissioner White stated the auto repair shop site next to the proposed location is zoned C-3 and has a large shop in the back of the lot. She stated Shorewood had such a small portion of land zoned for C-4 use. She agreed the proposed building size would need to be reduced. She stated she could recommend approval of this request to City Council. In response to Commissioner White's question, Director Nielsen explained the requirement for parking spaces is recommended by the Institute of Traffic Engineers. He stated Shorewood wanted to ensure adequate parking in commercial districts. Commissioner White stated maybe the Planning Commission should revisit parking space guidelines. She sited the Cub parking lot as an example of more parking being required than may have been necessary. She questioned the number of parking spaces this proposed request would require. Director Nielsen stated a review of parking space guidelines could be worthwhile, but he did not think the guidelines were significantly out of line. He went on to state this particular request may not need that much parking, but other C-3 land uses may need that many parking spaces. . Councilmember Wellens questioned the practicality of retail in that location; traffic in that area moves differently after the redesign of the County Road 19 intersection. He stated maybe the Planning Commission should review the possibility of changing that area to a C-4 District from a C-3 District. In response to Commissioner Meyer's question, Director Nielsen clarified if this request was approved the change applied to all C-3 Districts. He stated Shorewood does not favor spot zoning. He then reviewed which Shorewood properties were zoned C-3. Councilmember Meyer's stated he did not think this request was very different from other businesses in C-3 Districts. He stated more discussion should occur regarding broader ramifications of amending C-3 District regulations. Discussion ensued regarding what type of businesses the Planning Commission would want in this C-3 District and rezoning this site to a C-4 District. White moved Recommending Approval of Text Amendment to Allow General Trade Contractor's Shops in the C-3, General-Commercial Zoning District by Conditional Use. The motion died because it was not seconded. Jeff Speitzer, Sharratt Design Company, who was acting as the Fishers' Design Architect on the project, stated the Fishers' plans are for illustration purposes only. He stated should this request be approved it would be possible to reduce the size of the shop area, reduce the size of the office area, or possibly eliminate the proposed office space entirely. He stated the entire S J Fisher Construction staff does not go to the office on a daily basis; therefore less parking would be required. . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING December 6, 2005 Page 4 of 10 . Discussion ensued regarding the varying concerns by Commissioners regarding this request. Commissioner White expressed concern about Shorewood's lack of C-4 zoned property. She stated Shorewood zoning did not support non-retail type local businesses. Acting Chair Gagne stated Shorewood was a "bedroom community". Commissioner Woodruff asked for an explanation of C-4 District regulations which are part of the Zoning Code. Discussion ensued regarding the wording and the interpretation of the wording of C-4 land use regulations. . Steve Fisher asked the Planning Commission if their intended use of this property was for retail, which would create more traffic than his business would create. He stated S J Fisher Construction only has 6 employees and they do not have customers coming to their offices. He went on to question what that property could be used for, he did not see retail as suitable for that property. Gniffke moved, Woodruff seconded, recommending denial of Text Amendment to Allow General Trade Contractor's Shops in the C-3, General-Commercial Zoning District by Conditional Use. Motion passed 4/0/1 with White dissenting because Shorewood does not have enough C-4 zoned property to support local businesses. . Director Nielsen stated this request would still go to City Council which makes the final decision. Acting Chair Gagne closed the Public Hearing at 7:40 P.M. 2. PUBLIC HEARING - C.U.P. FOR COMMERCIAL BUILDING AND TEXT AMENDMENT REGARDING SHORELAND DISTRICT HARDCOVER REGULATIONS Applicant: Frostad Development Co. Location: 23505 Smithtown Road Acting Chair Gagne opened the Public Hearing at 7:40 P.M. Director Nielsen explained the history of this case, noting Frostad Development Company, LLC proposed redevelopment of the Shorewood Nursery property at 23505 Smithtown Road as an office building site. In his letter dated 30 November 2005, Todd Frostad explained his proposal. He requested a conditional use permit for the office building and also a zoning text amendment that would allow greater impervious surface for commercial sites within the "S", Shoreland District. In addition, Director Nielsen stated the property is zoned R-C/S, Residential-CommerciaVShoreland, contains 91,860 square feet of area (2.1 acres), and was currently occupied by the Shorewood Nursery. It consisted of three permanent structures, a trellis area, storage bins for landscape materials and outdoor storage area. The nursery exists under a conditional use permit. The property slopes gently from south to north with varying vegetation on all but the north side of the site. He went on to review land uses and zoning surrounding the subject property. . Director Nielsen stated the Frostad proposal included a 24,000 square-foot office building with associated parking to the north and south of the building and a drainage pond, located at the rear of the property. He CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING December 6, 2005 Page 5 of 10 . reviewed revised plans for the office building. The office building would be two stories in height. He stated revised building, landscaping, grading and utilities, and lighting plans had been submitted by the applicant. Director Nielsen stated the first action item is to consider recommending approval of a proposed Text Amendment Regarding Shoreland District Hardcover. Section 1201.26, Subd. 5.a.(5) of the Shorewood Zoning Code limits hardcover on properties within the Shoreland District to 25 percent of the lot area. Although the City has adopted higher impervious percentages for nonresidential uses outside of the Shoreland District (66 percent allowable, up to 75 percent by conditional use permit with storm water treatment), this was not extended to the areas within 1000 feet of the lake. The applicant requested the City amend the Code to allow the same percentages for commercial sites within the Shore land District, subject to management and treatment of runoff toward lakes. Director Nielsen went on to state Shorewood's preference for managing storm water runoff was always toward natural means (drainage swales and ponds), though Shorewood's Code also recognized mechanical means for control and treatment of runoff. The rather extensive underground treatment system designed for the Shorewood Shopping Center property was an example of this. That system was designed to meet Minnehaha Creek Watershed District standards for phosphorous and sediment removal (the primary purposes of treatment) and appeared to be functioning as designed . Director Nielsen reviewed the applicant's proposed plan for managing storm water using both natural and mechanical means. The plan was to drain the south half of the site to a new NURP (National Urban Runoff Program) pond at the rear of the site. Drainage from the north half of the property would be conducted to a 72-inch diameter concrete pipe, buried along the east side of the property. This pipe would serve as a storage basin and would be pumped to the pond. He went on to explain the remainder of the drainage plan. He stated this proposed system would have to meet Minnehaha Creek Watershed District standards for phosphorous and sediment removal. Director Nielsen stated Staff met with Julie Ekman, the MNDNR hydrologist for our area. She indicated the DNR is open to added hardcover percentages for commercial development where storm water runoff is managed and treated. He reviewed the City's consulting engineer concerns from his preliminary report. Todd Frostad, the applicant, explained the rationale behind his request. He stated his engineer believed having 75% impervious surface would actually improve the phosphorous levels over current conditions because of the proposed controlled storm water management system. He stated the 72 inch pipe being proposed would handle the storm water runoff for the site for a 2.5 inch rainfall. He expressed his willingness to meet with the City's consulting engineer to resolve any areas of concern he has. He then reviewed some of the proposed building construction specifics. Director Nielsen again stated the first decision the Planning Commission needed to make was whether or not to recommend amending the Shoreland District regulations text. If the decision was to amend the text then a C.U.P for this site would be required. . With regard to issues of land use for this case, Director Nielsen stated there were adequate parking spaces, but the rear yard and side yard abutting Wood Duck Circle should be heavily landscaped to provide a buffer for adjacent residential uses. Staff recommended the driveway on County Road 19 be placed another 20-30 feet to the east. He stated the landscaping on the south border and the southerly end of the west of the site should be augmented with a durable low-maintenance fence and that four foot high fencing should be considered along the east side. He went on to state the landscaping of this site should reflect the recommendations of the County Road 19 Corridor Study. Specifically, large evergreens should CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING December 6, 2005 Page 6 of 10 e be placed at the rear of the site to ultimately form a backdrop for the commercial site. He stated the landscape plan must be signed by a registered landscape architect and must provide for long-term maintenance. With regard to site design issues, Director Nielsen stated parking lot access aisles encroachments into the rear and side yard setback areas should be eliminated, the trash enclosure and loading area should be moved closer to the building, the lighting should be hooded, and C.u.P. should stipulate that site lighting, with the exception of minimal security lights, be turned off by 9:30 P.M. He stated detailed plans for the proposed drainage system would be reviewed by the City's consulting engineer when submitted. He explained the issuance of a building permit for the property would require connection to the municipal water system and payment of water charges. Based on the size of the property, it would be charged four REU's (residential equivalent units). Director Nielsen stated Staff suggested it was reasonable to allow more intense use of commercial properties than residential. In this regard Staff recommended an amendment to increase hardcover, subject to the recommendations of the City engineering consultant and approval by the MNDNR. Staff also recommended the Planning Commission consider "conceptual" approval for a conditional use permit, advising the applicant to return with revised plans that address the issues raised to the Planning Commission meeting scheduled for January 3, 2006. Seeing no one present wishing to speak on this topic, Acting Chair Gagne opened and closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public hearing at 8:12 P.M. . Mr. Frostad stated he would modify the plans based on Staff recommendations. He explained the trash storage would be done inside the building. He stated the greatest portion of the landscaping lies on City property and was not illustrated in the original landscape plan. The revised landscape plan would include the City landscape area and indicate what landscaping would stay. He stated his objective was not to just increase impervious surface; his proposed storm water management system would benefit the DNR, Watershed District and the community at large. The exterior of the building was designed to blend in with the neighborhood and could not be seen laterally. Commissioner Woodruff expressed concern for other properties and Lake Minnetonka if the Shore land District regulations for impervious surface be amended to increase the allowable amount to 66% hardcover with no permitting required and 75% hardcover with conditional use permitting required. He also stated he thought Mr. Frostad's proposal was good use of the land. He went on to suggest that if the regulations were amended, they should also include the requirement for a storm water management system when the impervious surface was greater than 25%. He stated if a requirement for storm water management system was not included in the amendment, he was not in favor of allowing that much hardcover. Director Nielsen stated, in response to a question from Commissioner Meyer, the Staff recommendation would be modified to require a c.u.P. for any hardcover in excess of 25%. He went on to state maybe specific standards, such a phosphorous removal, be added to the amendment. He listed the properties that would be affected by a change in Shoreland hardcover requirements. Commissioner White questioned how long it would take to treat a 2.5 inch rainfall and what happened if it rained more than 2.5 inches. . Director Nielsen stated regardless of the treatment, Shorewood has a standard specifying the threshold for rate control; the water cannot leave the site any faster after it was developed than before it was developed. . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING December 6, 2005 Page 7 of 10 He stated storm water calculations included in detailed plans are required to assess the systems ability to handle heavy and/or continuous rains. Director Nielsen stated regardless of the treatment, Shorewood had a standard specifying the threshold for rate control; the water cannot leave the site any faster after it was developed than before it was developed. He stated storm water calculations included in detailed plans are required to assess the system's ability to handle heavy and/or continuous rains. Mr. Frostad stated he did not have the release rates but would provide them. In response to Councilmember Wellens question, Mr. Frostad stated there are no current plans to operate the greenhouse. He also responded to another question from Mr. Wellens and stated there was no problem with moving the entrance from County Road 19 to the east. Director Nielsen stated Staff looked at regulations governing commercial development in Shoreland areas for Mound and Wayzata; they are relatively up-to-date. Their regulations are quite consistent with the language found in Shorewood's Shoreland regulations. Both cities allow hardcover up to 75%; Spring Park and Excelsior allow up to 100%. He stated if the Planning Commission wanted to approve a "text amendment" the language should elaborate on storm water treatment and include specific standards, such as phosphorous removal, suggested by the City consulting engineer. In response to Commissioner White's question regarding occupancy levels, Mr. Frostad stated it was variable because the building would be built to provide for single and multiple tenant occupancy. He stated it would be infrequent that all occupants would be on site at the same time. In response to White's question regarding the need for all the parking he had proposed, Mr. Frostad stated he planned for near the maximum amount of parking that would be required. Director Nielsen stated the parking space standard used was a fairly common standard. In response to a question from Commissioner Gniffke, Mr. Frostad stated the City consulting engineer's recommendations were acceptable. Acting Chair Gagne stated he did not think the hardcover percentage should be increased to 75%, and he would prefer the Shorewood Nursery to a two story building on the site. He also expressed concerns about 100 year rains that seem to be occurring every two years. Commissioner White expressed concern that allowing hardcover up to 75% would make the Shoreland properties like any other properties; Shore land is supposed to be more green space not pavement. Director Nielsen stated the question that existed was whether or not commercial use of that site is appropriate. He stated it was currently zoned for office space with conditional use permit. Staff had spoken to the DNR and they will accept conditions similar to Mound and Wayzata. Shorewood's minimal amount of Shoreland differentiates it from the other communities. Nielsen stated if commercial use can not be made of a site then perhaps the site should not be zoned commercial. In response to a question from Commissioner White, Director Nielsen explained because the site was zoned R-C (Residential Commercial) double homes could be built on the property. Commissioner White again expressed concern with allowing up to 75% hardcover; she would like to see a lower maximum amount such as 66%. . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING December 6, 2005 Page 8 of 10 Woodruff moved, Meyer seconded, for the Planning Commission to direct Staff to prepare a draft Text Amendment to Shoreland Hardcover Regulations to Allow up to a Maximum of 75% Hardcover Subject to Storm Water Runoff Treatment Requirements and Standards. Commissioner White stated she did not want to see 75% hardcover for Shoreland allowed. She questioned the need for such a drastic increase, from 25% to 75%, and would be more comfortable with an increase to 66%. Commissioner Woodruff stated if the amended regulations specified detailed requirements for handling storm water runoff he did not see a need to require a conditional use permit process to go from 66% to 75% hardcover. Discussion ensued regarding various impervious surfaces in the City and what the maximum hardcover percentage should be. Commissioner White expressed concern over development of other sites in proximity to this site and how much hardcover those sites would end up with. Motion passed, 3/2 with Gagne and White dissenting. Gniftke motioned, White seconded, to Continue the Public Hearing for the C.U.P. to the January 3, 2006, Planning Commission Meeting where the Applicant would provide engineering documents and revised plans that would address site issues identified. Motion passed, 5/0. Acting Chair Gagne closed the Public Hearing at 8:40 P.M. 3. MINOR SUBDIVISION Applicant: George Danser Location: 5840 Christmas Lake Road George Danser did not appear at the December 6, 2005, Planning Commission meeting to provide a response to areas of concern identified at the November 1,2005, Planning Commission meeting. Woodruff moved, White seconded, to Continue the case to the January 3, 2006, Planning Commission Meeting. Motion passed 5/0. 4. MINOR SUBDIVISION Applicant: Mark Kennedy Location: 23975 Yellowstone Road Director Nielsen explained Mark Kennedy, who owns the property located at 23975 Yellowstone Trail, had successfully gotten his property rezoned to R-1C, Single-Family Residential, and he now proposed to subdivide the lot into two building sites. He went on to state the property contains 44,045 square feet of area and was occupied by the applicant's home and a detached garage. The proposed lots will be 23,886 square feet (westerly lot) and 20,159 square feet (easterly lot) in area. The property drops off to the southwest corner into a small wetland basin. Director Nielsen stated both of the proposed lots comply with the requirements of the R-1C zoning district. The westerly lot will have approximately 16.6 percent of hardcover. He noted the patio on the CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING December 6, 2005 Page 9 of 10 . northeast side of the house encroaches into the required side yard setback. This should be corrected as a condition of approval. Director Nielsen stated Staff recommended the minor division be approved subject to the following: 1. The applicant must provide legal descriptions and deeds for drainage and utility easements, 10 feet around each lot, and a conservation easement extending to 35 feet (wetland buffer) from the wetland delineation. The conservation easement must staked on the property with wetland boundary markers approved by the City. 2. The patio encroachment into the required side yard setback on the northeast side of the house must be corrected. 3. The applicant must provide an up-to-date (within 30 days) title opinion for review by the City Attorney. 4. Prior to release of the resolution approving the request, the applicant must pay one park dedication fee ($2000) and one local sanitary sewer access charge ($1200). 5. Since the division itself does not result in the removal of any trees from the property, tree preservation and reforestation can be addressed at the time building permits are applied for. . In response to a question from Mark Kennedy, Director Nielsen explained the $2000 park dedication fee was to support increased demand on the parks from new lots. He stated some cities charge 10% of the property value for the park dedication fee. Counci1member Woodruff stated the well on the proposed new lot supplies water to the existing home. He questioned if there were any provisions for use of the well once the existing home was sold. Director Nielsen stated there were two approaches for the use of the well after the existing home is sold: 1) the applicant could continue to use the well until the existing lot was sold and at that time grant an easement for the new home to use the well; or 2) he could drill a new well for the new property. He went on to state a well can have a temporary abandonment for up to a year. Meyer moved, Woodruff seconded, Recommending Approval of a Request for Minor Subdivision, subject to Staff Recommendations, for Mark Kennedy, 23975 Yellowstone Road. Motion passed 5/0. 5. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. 6. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen stated the Frostad and Danser cases are continued to the January 3, 2006, Planning Commission meeting. . Commissioner White stated the Planning Commission may want to consider rezoning the Fisher site to C- 4. Director Nielson stated rezoning may not be appropriate, but the land use aspects of that site could be . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING December 6, 2005 Page 10 of 10 reviewed. White questioned the distinction between the auto repair shop site land use and the proposed S J Fisher Construction Company land use; both would have large shops on their property. Director Nielsen stated the Planning Commission reviewed the C-3 District land uses in 2005 but had not completed the task. He proposed a complete review all land uses of a C-3 District at a Planning Commission Study Session in January 2006. Council Liaison Wellens suggested a review of the C-4 strip mall also. 7. REPORTS · Liaison to Council Council Liaisons were selected as followed: January 2006 Commissioner White February 2006 Commissioner Gniffke March 2006 Commissioner Meyer April 2006 Commissioner Woodruff · SLUC No report given. · Other Acting Chair Gagne thanked Councilmember Wellens and City Council for the appreciation gathering on December 2,2005. The Commissioners extended their appreciation. 8. ADJOURNMENT Gniffke moved, White seconded, Adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of December 6, 2005. Motion passed 5/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. Christine Freeman, Recorder