Loading...
030607 pl mn . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, 6 MARCH 2007 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chair Schmitt called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Schmitt; Commissioners Geng, Gniffke, Hutchins, Meyer, and Ruoff; Planning Director Nielsen, and Council Liaison Wellens Absent: Commissioner Gagne 1. 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - C.U.P. AMENDMENT FOR DOCKING OF EXCELSIOR FIRE DISTRICT FIRE/RESCUE POWERBOAT Chair Schmitt opened the Public Hearing at 7:01 P.M., noting the procedures utilized in a Public Hearing. Director Nielsen stated Mike Maloney, representing the Shorewood Yacht Club (SYC), had requested an amendment to the SYC's current conditional use permit (C.D.P.) that would allow the Excelsior Fire District to keep its fire/rescue boat at the SYC. The SYC was located at 600 West Lake Street. Mr. Maloney's request proposed that a new dock would be built on the west end of the SYC property, near Timber Lane. Nielsen reviewed site location maps which illustrated the location of the new dock relative to Timber Lane and relative to the entire SYC site. Nielsen then reviewed the history of the SYC and its existing C.D.P. He explained the SYC club was originally granted a c.u.P. (by court order) as a sailing yacht club in 1979. At that time the property was zoned for single-family residential use. In the early 1980's it became a nonconforming use when the City eliminated yacht clubs as conditional uses in residential zoning districts. During that time, the City also created a very specialized zoning district, the L-R, Lakeshore Recreational District, to address the existing nonconforming multiple-dock facilities in Shorewood. Nielsen then explained that in 2000 the then owners of the SYC applied to rezone the property from single-family residential to L-R and for a C.D.P. pursuant to L-R district requirements. The rezoning and c.u.P. requests were approved, along with an annual license for a multiple dock facility, subject to the rules of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD). A condition of both the rezoning approval and the C.D.P. approval was that the SYC would continue to be operated as a sailing sacht club. Exceptions to the sail boat restriction were: 1) the SYC could keep four power boats for club use in conjunction with sailing activities (e.g. judges' boats for armadas, towing disabled boats, etc.); and 2) the SYC would be able to dock boats and machinery associated with milfoil harvesting, without sacrificing allowable slips. Nielsen went on to explain that despite the restrictions, the owners of the SYC at that time took advantage of the zoning by adding additional land to the west end of the site, which allowed the SYC to add a fourth pier to its dock configuration. It also expanded its boat repair facility, none of which could have been done when the SYC existed as nonconforming use. In retrospect, the addition of the fourth pier may not have been a good decision. According to the then owners of the SYC, the market for sailing fell off . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 6 March 2007 Page 2 of7 dramatically, and they had not been able to fill the additional slips with sailboats. An attempt to amend the C.D.P. to allow power boats was turned down in 2003. With regard to issues of analysis for this case, Director Nielsen stated the Excelsior Fire District (EFD) was interested in reducing its response time for lake-related emergencies. The EFD currently docked its fire/rescue boat at the Tonka Bay municipal docks; although the location worked for the EFD, it was not ideal. The Tonka Bay location resulted in delayed response times due to the driving distance from EFD Station 1. The water at the Tonka Bay location was a minimum-wake zone until the watercraft was out of the bay, and this caused further response time delays. Nielsen stated the EFD Chief explained how the EFD fire/rescue boat was used and how frequently it was used in a memorandum from him dated 26 February 2007. The memo also addressed a number of concerns that had been raised by area residents. One of the concerns raised in the previous amendment request for power boats was the impact 'wave action would have on the shoreline in the vicinity of the SYC. The Chief's memo explained the fire/rescue boat was used approximately 20-22 times a season, and emergencies accounted for 10 of the occasions on which the boat would leave the dock. Also, the fire/rescue boat would only have to leave the dock at accelerated speeds on outbound emergency trips. Nielsen then stated concern had been raised with regard to what, if any, precedent would be established by allowing another power boat to be docked at the SYC. He stated the City granted the SYC the right to house weed harvesting equipment at the site; therefore, if there was any precedent it would probably be in favor of the EFD docking its boat at the SYC. Nielsen explained one of the concerns raised by the area residents was parking for EFD vehicles. The Chief's memo explained that on most occasions emergency personnel would arrive at the dock site in one rescue vehicle. There may be times when a Duty Officer may also come to the dock site in a separate vehicle, and occasionally another vehicle may bring additional supplies to the site. A location for parking the vehicles still needed to be determined. Timber Lane was a narrow street with limited parking available. There was an old LRT Trail running parallel to the lake shore that was to be chained off and used only minimally for a sailing school; if that was where the applicants proposed to park, they should explain what, if any, site alteration (i.e. tree removal) may be necessary to accommodate the parking. Nielsen stated Staff recommended that the fire/rescue boat be kept in one of the empty slips on SYC dock #4 until such time as the current yacht club owners were successful in filling the slips. It would not be fair to the owners to sacrifice a paying slip. That alternative would delay the need to construct yet another dock on the property, and it would also provide time to address the issues of access and parking on Timber Lane. Director Nielsen stated Mike Maloney and Gabriel Jabbour, representing the SYC, and EFD Chief Gerber and Firefighter Doug Sweeney, from theEFD, were present this evening to answer any questions the Commission may have. Mike Maloney, 231 Third Street and co-owner of the SYC, explained the reason a new dock was recommended (rather than using an existing slip on dock #4) was access to dock # 4 was on SYC property and that driveway was shared with a dredging company located next to the SYC; heavy equipment frequently obstructed the use of the driveway. Also, during the spring boat launch and fall boat removal time periods the SYC property itself was quite congested; therefore, the rescue vehicles would not be able to get very close to the fire/rescue boat. Gabriel Jabbour, a co-owner of the SYC and an Orono resident, stated that during his Tenure as Mayor of Orono he had been involved with the construction of two fire stations. During that construction an issue of locating one of the stations "one driveway away" caused great concern among the public because it CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 6 March 2007 Page 3 of 7 . would result in a 16-second delay in response times. He stated he had previously worked with the LMCD to identify locations for four fire/rescue boats that would allow for fast response times. He also was involved in establishing a helipad on Bid Island. He commented that he had personally transported two individuals in crisis situations from Big Island to Excelsior. From his vantage point, he thought parking public emergency vehicles on Timber Lane was a reasonable use of a public road. Mr. Jabbour noted that the SYC would not make any money from the EFD's use of a new dock; rather it would result in a cost to the SYC. He suggested that Director Nielsen take an aerial photograph of the SYC and surrounding properties to determine the relative location of the proposed dock to existing residents' docks and shorelines. Chief Gerber, an EFD representative, stated the fire/rescue boat was only one of the EFD's emergency response tools. He explained that the EFD solicited donations in 2002 - 2003 to purchase its current boat; the boat allowed for better response times and provided better safety for the EFD firefighters than its previous boat. He stated the EFD did not want to inconvenience any residents or cause undue harm to the public during its fire/rescue operations. The EFD's mission was to provide the most effective public safety service it could; based on the locations of the two EFD fire stations, docking its fire/rescue at the SYC rather than the Tonka Bay municipal docks would improve emergency response times. The EFD had participated in meetings with the Hennepin County Water Patrol, the Long Lake fire department, the Mound fire department, the Wayzata fire department, and the St. Bonifacius fire department (which did not have boat stationed on the lake) regarding the location of fire/rescue boats on Lake Minnetonka and providing the most effective fire protection on the Lake. With regard to parking, he stated the EFD and the SYC had envisioned that rescue vehicles would park along Timber Lane and perhaps a portion of the gated LRT Trail area; the specifics had not been determined yet. . Chair Schmitt opened the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:25 P.M. Marjorie Yaeger. 5445 Timber Lane, stated her son had addressed her concerns in written form to Council regarding the request for additional dockage at the SYC for an EFD fire/rescue boat and the use of Timber Lane to access the boat. (The Commissioners were provided a copy of the correspondence in their meeting packet). She stated in addition to the issues identified in the correspondence, Timber Lane was a school bus-stop road. Steve Haskins. 5445 Timber Lane, questioned what would happen to the additional dock if the EFD ceased docking its fire/rescue boat there. Director Nielsen explained that one of the conditions of the C.U.P. would be the dock would no longer be allowed if the EFD ceased using it. Chair Schmitt closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:27 P.M. In response to a question from Commissioner Meyer, Director Nielsen stated the c.u.P. could address any issues (e.g. parking) the Commission may have. In response to a question from Director Nielsen, Chief Gerber stated that during conversations topics such as removing the lock to access the trail property for parking, removing trees on that property, etc., had been discussed, but nothing had been resolved. . In response to a question from Commissioner Gniffke, Chief Gerber explained what the rescue vehicles would be: the largest EFD rescue truck; a Duty Officer vehicle (a Ford Expedition); and a four-door supply truck (a pickup). In response to a question from Commissioner Meyer, Gerber explained that during emergency operations only the emergency vehicle lights and sirens would be on from the time the vehicle left the station until it arrived at the site. . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 6 March 2007 Page 4 of7 In response to a question from Commissioner Ruoff, Mr. Maloney stated the parking area would be dependent on where the boat would be docked. Chair Schmitt clarified that if dock #4 were used then rescue vehicle parking would be on the SYC property; if a new dock were installed then parking would occur on Timber Lane or the LRT Trail. Mr. Jabbour stated that during boat removal and launch time periods it would not work for the EFD to dock its boat on dock #4. In response to a question from Commissioner Hutchins, Mr. Mahoney explained that trees may have to be trimmed on the LRT Trail or the new dock site location as they had never been pruned in the past; the trees were volunteer trees. In response to another question, Mr. Mahoney stated the LMCD recommended the request specify an 80-foot long dock to ensure there was adequate water depth and the fire/rescue boat was eight-foot wide by 25-feet long thereby requiring a 20-foot slip. In response to a question from Chair Schmitt, Mr. Mahoney stated the LMCD had approved the request. In response to a question from Commissioner Geng regarding the abandoned right-of-way, Director Nielsen explained the trail area near the SYC had been used primarily by the SYC and part of that area was cleared out. In response to a question fro Commissioner Gniffke, Firefighter Sweeney explained that when the EFD fire/rescue boat was docked at Excelsior navigating through the crowds when responding to emergencies was a problem (both in downtown Excelsior and at the dock). In response to a question from Commissioner Ruoff, Chief Gerber stated the best situation for parking to access the proposed dock would be on the east side of Timber Lane just past the LRT Trail; there would also be approximately the same amount of parking space on Timber Lane immediately after the 900 turn in the road. Mr. Mahoney stated there was minimal shoulder on Timber Lane after the turn. He also stated that the SYC would not have an issue with parking on the end LRT Trail property. Mr. Jabbour stated the SYC did not currently use the portion of the LRT Trail in proximity to it. In response to a question from Commissioner Ruoff with regard to response times to a slip on dock #4 and a new dock slip, Mr. Mahoney stated there would be certain times of the year when response times to access dock #4 would be increased significantly because of boats and other equipment on the property. Mr. Jabbour commented that the new dock would be an extension of the EFD; it would be a private dock that should be accessed by EFD personnel only. In response to a question from Commissioner Hutchins, Chief Gerber explained that the EFD would refurbish dock components donated by the SYC for the new dock. In response to another question, Director Nielsen stated he was not aware if there no-parking restrictions on Timber Lane after the 900 turn in the road. Nielsen then stated if Timber Lane was to be used for parking, no-parking restrictions may need to be considered. Chair Schmitt stated that anytime there was an opportunity to increase safety for residents that opportunity should be taken advantage of. He then stated he would support the new dock scenario with parking on Timber Lane; seconds lost in responding to an emergency could have a significant negative impact on the outcome. He would like to specify parking requirements as a condition of the C.U.P. Commissioner Gniffke stated he would support the request for a new dock and Timber Lane access. He also stated the EFD should be able to manage the existence of a lock on a chain-link fence when accessing the LRT Trail (i.e., cut the lock). Chair Schmitt stated lock on the chain-link fence should remam. . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 6 March 2007 Page 5 of7 Councilmember Wellens stated the Commission may want to review the previous agreement with the SYC with regard to use of the LRT Trail property. He suggested that the City Attorney be asked for a legal opinion regarding what, if any, impact there would be of allowing the EFD to dock its fire/rescue boat at a new dock at the SYC relative to future motor-boat docking requests. Wellens stated the previous owner, Mr. Cross, had stated there had been an issue with churning of phosphorous in the bay. Director Nielsen stated the City Attorney had not been contacted regarding this request, but he was going to ask for a legal opinion. He commented that he did not think that granting the request for another dock at the SYC for use by an emergency vehicle would set a precedent. In response to another question, Nielsen stated a condition of granting the C.U.P. could be the review and approval by the City Attorney. Meyer suggested that another condition of the C.U.P. should be the fire/rescue boat would adhere to minimum wake restrictions unless responding to an emergency. Meyer moved, Hutchins seconded, Recommending Approval of a Text Amendment to the Shorewood Yacht Club's Current Conditional Use Permit that would Allow the Excelsior Fire District to keep its Fire/Rescue Boat at the Proposed New Dock, subject to the City Attorney having no Objection to the C.U.P. Amendment and Staff Approval of To-Be-Determined Parking Arrangements. Motion passed 6/0. Chair Schmitt closed the Public Hearing at 7:42 P.M. 2. DEADLINE EXTENSION FOR VARIANCE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Applicant: Tony Lund Location: 27695 Island View Road Director Nielsen stated that approximately one year ago Council granted a Conditional Use Permit and Lot Area Variance (Resolution No. 06-020) to Rohan Lund Inc., for the property located at 27695 Island View Road. Due to the poor housing market, Rohan Lund had not been able to find a buyer for the property, not had it been able to secure financing to start a home that was not pre-sold. The property had been listed for sale and would continue to be listed. Rohan Lund would also continue to pursue financing to build a spec home on the property. Tony Lund, representing Rohan Lund, requested an extension for the C.U.P. and Lot Area Variance beyond the one-year time limit. Nielsen explained the ordinance did allow for an extension. Director Nielsen stated Staff recommended approving the extension for a period no greater than six months from the date of Council approval. In response to a question from Commissioner Hutchins, Director Nielsen stated the reason a C.U.P. was required was the original house on the property was significantly nonconforming; the proposed home would be in conformance. There was also a drainage issue on the property; the location for the proposed house would better accommodate the drainage issue. Gniffke moved, Hutchins seconded, Recommending Approval of a Not-To-Exceed Six-Month Extension of Resolution No. 06-020, a Conditional Use Permit and Lot Area Variance for Rohan Lund Inc. Motion passed 6/0. 3. DISCUSS 2007 WORK PROGRAM . Director Nielsen reviewed the topics for the discussion in the 2007 Planning Commission work program. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 6 March 2007 Page 6 of7 . . Comprehensive Plan Study of Planning District 6 - This item was placed on the back burner last year after the Shorewood Yacht Club was purchased. Discussions with current SYC owners and interest in nearby properties make this a higher priority for this year. Review Planning Inventory - This had not been done recently Update the City's Comprehensive Plan - Although the Comp Plan was completed in 2006, the Met Council mandates that it be updated again by the end of 2008. Work in 2007 would mainly be background, inventory and some discussion of policies. Historic Preservation - Develop Data Base . Zoning Review Zoning Code - in particular parking requirements Annual Variance Discussion 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR . Steve Pahl. 24680 Smithtown Road, questioned if the Planning Commission and Council procedures allowed for a property owner to obtain preliminary approval or denial of a request prior to completing all the necessary and costly items required to file a formal application. He stated it was his understanding that Tonka Bay's Council had done that. He then stated he had a 900-foot long x 144-foot wide piece of property that he would like to subdivide, but he did not want to incur the expense of items (such as a surveys) which were required to submit an application, if it was unlikely the application would be approved. He stated he needed to sell the property for financial reasons; and if he was able to subdivide the property and sell it he could possibly afford to purchase another house in Shorewood. Chair Schmitt stated the best way to address Mr. Pahl's request was to work with Staff. He then stated variances could not be granted based on economic considerations. He explained that there were rules that must be followed for granting variances. Director Nielsen explained that the City. Code documented the administrative procedures that must be followed to obtain the information necessary to make land use decisions. Nielsen stated that from his perspective, land use decisions were some of the most important decisions made; if the information necessary to make an informed decision was not available, it would not be possible to make a responsible decision. He then stated he did not think it would be fair to an applicant to make a preliminary approval decision, only to possibly have it reversed at a later date when all the information was available. Director Nielsen then explained the application fee was $300. Mr. Pahl stated he would also have to have had a tree count done. Mr. Pahl also stated property owners should not have to pay for a topographical map (the City already had that information) or preliminary survey. Nielsen stated the Shorewood residents were not responsible for paying for a survey for Mr. Pahl. Mr. Pahl stated he had a relatively recent survey done when he built an addition on his home. . Chair Schmitt stated there were rules and procedures that must be followed. It was up to Mr. Pahl to determine if the cost of gathering all the necessary information to make an application was worth the risk of a possible denial of his application. He then stated there was potential risk for the City to indicate preliminary approval of an application without all the information and then at a later date deny the application because of new information. . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 6 March 2007 Page 70f7 Mr. Pahl stated he had no issue with paying the $300 application fee. He did not think it was appropriate to have to pay for a topographical map and survey if there was not preliminary approval. Commissioner Meyer stated there were a number of conditions that must be satisfied before a variance would be granted. In response to a comment by Meyer, Director Nielsen explained the City's Code had a provision for a sketch-plan review. The applicant would submit their basic information to the Planning Department, and Staff would review the application and discuss issues with the applicant. Nielsen also explained that he refrained from telling an applicant what the chance would be of having the application approved. He does tell the applicant if the request does satisfy variance criteria. He stated it was not appropriate for the Commission to make a decision without adequate information; nor was it fair for surrounding property owners to be uninformed of discussions regarding the application. Director Nielsen noted that applicants can use the City's topography maps for a cost, and it would be cheaper than anything else the applicant could try to purchase. 5. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen stated the topic of Planning District 6 would be discussed at the Planning Commission Study Session scheduled for March 20,2007. 6. REPORTS . Liaison to Council No report given. · SLUC Director Nielsen explained the City belonged to an organization called the Sensible Land Use Coalition. The membership consisted of private and public sector employees. The SLUC had monthly meetings where a variety of topics were discussed. The City would reimburse the cost for Commissioners to attend the meetings. A flyer was included in Commission meeting packets informing the Commissioners of the upcoming dates and topics for the meetings. The Commissioners should inform Nielsen if they want to attend. . Other Director Nielsen stated the LMCD was interested in individuals applying for a task force it was assembling. 7. ADJOURNMENT Gniffke moved, Meyer seconded, Adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of 6 March 2007 at 8:18 P.M. Motion passed 4/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. Christine Freeman, Recorder