Loading...
112007 pl mn CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL CHAMBERS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD TUESDAY, 20 NOVEMBER 2007 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 Gagne, Geng, Gniffke, Hutchins, Meyer, and Ruoff; Planning Director Nielsen; and Councilmember Callies Absent: None APPROVAL OF MINUTES 16 October 2007 ?? Gagne moved, Hutchins seconded, Approving the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of 16 October 2007 as presented. Motion passed 6/0/1 with Ruoff abstaining due to his absence at the meeting. 1. L-R ZONING DISTRICT TEXT AMENDMENT AND C.U.P AMENDMENT (continued from 16 October 2007) Applicant: Shorewood Yacht Club Location: 600 West Lake Street Chair Schmitt stated this item was continued from the October 16, 2007, Planning Commission meeting. He then stated at that meeting the Commission directed Staff to prepare a draft resolution; the Commissioners had received three versions of the draft resolution (which included the revision it received at the meeting). Director Nielsen explained the most recent version included a change to Item A.7 under Conclusions; the change, which was recommended by Councilmember Callies, included a provision which linked the enforcement and monitoring to the interim conditional use permit (C.U.P.). Nielsen then read the revised Item A.7. Commissioner Gagne noted that the interim C.U.P. allowed for the Shorewood Yacht Club (SYC) to rent 35 slips for power boat use; that would allow a total 40 power boats to be harbored in the water at the SYC (the SYC was already allowed three power boats which were used by management, one power boat for the residents of 5585 Timber Lane, and the Excelsior Fire District’s rescue boat). Director Nielsen explained this request also required an amendment to the City Code Section 1201.24 Subd. 10.d regarding the L-R, Lakeshore Recreational District. He then reviewed the draft amendment (the changes are italicized) – “d. Issuance of a license shall take into consideration the historic use of the site under consideration with respect to the use of power boats. With the exception of power boats necessary for the operation of the facility and publicly-owned watercraft operated by public safety personnel, water harboring of boats on any site in Gideon’s Bay shall be limited to sailing boats only. Upon a favorable recommendation by the Planning Commission, the City Council may license a limited CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 20 November 2007 Page 2 of 6 number of power boats, provided the essential character of the property as a sailing facility is maintained.” Nielsen then explained the Planning Commission must first take action to recommend the text amendment and then take action to recommend the draft resolution. Commissioner Geng stated he had a question with regard to the following statement in the Interim C.U. P. Item A.7 under Conclusions – “The determination shall be based upon the number and nature of complaints received and compliance with this permit.” He questioned how complaints without merit would be addressed. Director Nielsen stated the Interim C.U.P. specified the Staff would monitor verifiable complaints filed through the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department (SLMPD); it would ultimately result in a judgment call. Chair Schmitt stated he shared Commissioner Geng’s concern; during previous Planning Commission discussions on this topic the subjectivity of complaints had been discussed which was why the nature of the complaints had to be considered as well as the number of complaints. Commissioner Ruoff questioned how the situation would be handled if there was one verifiable complaint filed through the SLMPD and then there were 65 others that had not been filed through the SLMPD. Nielsen stated if, for example, the City received a complaint during normal business hours that there were power boats docked at slips other than those designated Staff could go down and research the complaint. In response to a question from Commissioner Gagne, Director Nielsen explained at the end of the three- year term for the Interim C.U.P. the Planning Commission would make a recommendation to the City Council regarding converting the Interim C.U.P. to a permanent C.U.P. (which would require another Public Hearing), continuing the Interim C.U.P., or discontinuing the Interim C.U.P. With regard to a question from Commissioner Ruoff about the “essential character of the property” statement in the text amendment, Director Nielsen explained the original Staff report recommended the number of rental slips that could be used for power boats should be less than the 50 percent requested to keep with essential character. Gagne moved, Gniffke seconded, recommending approval of the draft text amendment to City Code Section 1201.24 Subd. 10.d. Motion passed 7.0. Gagne moved, Meyer seconded, recommending approval of the draft resolution of the Interim Conditional User Permit for Michael Maloney and Gabriel Jabbour allowing a certain number of power boats at the Shorewood Yacht Club, subject to the review and comment by the City Attorney. Motion passed 7.0. Chair Schmitt stated this item would be placed on the November 26, 2007, City Council meeting agenda for consideration. 2. MINOR SUBDIVISION Applicants: Dan and Milissa Nelson Location: 25865 Birch Bluff Road Director Nielsen stated Dan and Milissa Nelson’s (25865 Birch Bluff Road) minor subdivision request was continued from the October 16, 2007, Planning Commission meeting (which had been continued from the October 2, 2007, meeting) pending receipt of a revised grading plan. Mr. Nelson had since submitted a new plan which had been distributed to the Commission. Mr. Nelson had also submitted a CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 20 November 2007 Page 3 of 6 letter from Gene and Judy Ruffenach, the owners of the property to the east of the Nelsons, stating that they would be willing to forego the use of the Second Street right-of-way as access to their property. Nielsen explained that the two significant issues associated with this request were site alteration and access. He then reviewed how these issues had been addressed. With regard to access, Nielsen stated in a letter the Ruffenachs’ offered to waive any right to use the Second Street right-of-way which eliminated the problem of having to develop a private road to serve three lots. The Ruffenachs’ were satisfied that their property could be adequately accessed via Meadow View Court, which extended to the southeast corner of their property. Although the letter provided by the Ruffenachs expressed their intent, it was not considered a recordable document. If the subdivision were to be approved, it should be contingent upon a deed restriction or a development agreement (which he would prefer because it was easier to do and to understand) between the Ruffenachs and the City, suitable for recording with Hennepin County, being recorded against the Ruffenach property. The purpose of the agreement was to put any future owners of the property on notice that Second Street could not be used to access the property. Because the Nelson’s existing house and a new house on the new lot would share a considerable length of common driveway, a driveway easement and maintenance agreement must be provided by the applicants’ attorney. Staff would provide the applicant with a sample of such an agreement for use by their attorney. The City had received a request by an adjoining neighbor that the common portion of the driveway serving the Nelson’s property and the proposed new lot be paved to control dust. This had been past practice by the City and should have been required with the original right-of-way permit for the Nelson property. Any approval of the subdivision should include a requirement that the common driveway be paved. Since the new home would require the installation of a new sewer service along Second Street, it may be best to require paving at the time a building permit was issued for the new house. An alternative would be to have the applicant install the sewer and pave the driveway as a condition of subdivision approval. The resolution approving the division should specify which alternative will be required. With regard to site alteration, Nielsen stated the applicants had submitted a revised grading plan which would result in significantly less site alteration than their previous plan had. Approval of the subdivision should include reference to the revised plan, recognizing that the proposed house was only illustrative of how the lot may be built upon. The resolution should put any future owner of the newly created lot on notice that construction on the lot may well require a conditional use permit for fill in excess of 100 cubic yards, that the retaining wall would have to be engineered by a registered engineer, and that any altered slopes could not exceed 3:1 grade. A detailed tree preservation and reforestation plan would be required as part of any building permit for the new home. Nielsen the reviewed a summary of what should be required in conjunction with any approval of the proposed subdivision. 1. The applicant’s surveyor must provide the following legal descriptions: a. The drainage and utility easements, 10 feet wide on each side of the north, east and west borders for both lots. b. The drainage and conservation easements over the wetland areas, including the 35-foot wetland buffer, for both lots. c. The proposed 30-foot driveway easement that would extend along the north side of the new lot. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 20 November 2007 Page 4 of 6 2. The applicant’s surveyor must provide a survey showing where required wetland buffer stakes would be placed on both lots. The buffer must be staked with City-approved wetland markers at the time the corners of the lots were staked (within 60 days of recording the resolution approving the request). 3. A deed restriction or development agreement must be prepared and recorded against the Ruffenach property to the east, including the waiver of any right to use Second Street for the future development of the Ruffenach property. That restriction or agreement must be recorded at Hennepin County, together with the resolution approving the subdivision. 4. Future construction on the new lot would be subject to the following restrictions: a. Grading on the lot and the construction of necessary retaining walls shall be designed by a registered professional engineer. No site alteration shall result in a disturbed slope in excess of 3:1. b. Fill in excess of 100 cubic yards on the site shall require a conditional use permit per Shorewood Zoning Code requirements. c. The common portion of the driveway serving the two lots (existing and proposed) shall be paved as part of construction of the new house on the easterly lot. d. The owner of the house on the newly created lot must enter into an encroachment agreement for use of the Second Street right-of-way. e. The revised grading plan dated October 23, 2007, shall be used as a guide for the future development of the new lot. 5. The applicant must have a deed restriction or development agreement prepared, suitable for recording, with the City as a signatory; the restriction or agreement would be recorded with the resolution approving the division. The deed restriction or development agreement should put future property buyers on notice that the lot was restricted as set forth in the resolution. 6. The applicant must enter into a new right-of-way encroachment agreement with the City. 7. Prior to release of the resolution approving the subdivision, the applicant must pay a park dedication fee ($2000) and local sanitary sewer access charges ($1200) for the new lot. 8. The applicant should provide an up-to-date (within 30 days) title opinion on the property for review by the City Attorney. 9. Ordinarily, the City would require the above items to be completed within 30 days of Council approval of the application. Given the amount of legal and surveying work involved with this matter, it is recommended that the deadline to complete the items should be 60 days. In response to a question from Mr. Nelson, Director Nielsen explained that any time a new lot was created the City had the opportunity to acquire land for parks or if the City did not want land it could collect a fee in lieu of land for a contribution to the City’s park system. He went on to explain the current park dedication fee was $2,000 (the Park Commission recently recommended the fee be increased to $5,000). He then explained the $1,200 local sanitary sewer access charge was for the lots’ portion of the sewer system infrastructure. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 20 November 2007 Page 5 of 6 Chair Schmitt stated based on his experience a development agreement was usually for a defined period of time and when that time had elapsed the legal restriction went away; and a deed restriction was permanent. Councilmember Callies stated she was not aware of any law which stated a development agreement elapsed after a certain time period. Nielsen stated the City Attorney would be asked to provide an opinion on this matter. Schmitt stated he would prefer a deed restriction. Nielsen stated a development agreement was easier to prepare; the City Attorney prepared the agreement and the applicants’ had to agree with it and sign it. With regard to a question from Chair Schmitt about the requirement to pave the common portion of the driveway when a new house was built on the new lot, Director Nielsen explained the deed restriction or development agreement along with the resolution and the Staff report would be filed in the property’s file. Nielsen then stated once the driveway was paved that restriction could be removed. Meyer moved, Gagne seconded, recommending approval of the minor subdivision for Dan and Melissa Nelson, 25865 Birch Bluff Road, subject to the provisions specified in the Staff report and to the City Attorney’s review and comment. Motion passed 7/0. Chair Schmitt stated this item would be placed on the November 26, 2007, City Council meeting agenda for consideration. Director Nielsen explained that Council would direct Staff to prepare a resolution and Council would consider that resolution at its December 10, 2007 meeting provided all the necessary legal descriptions and deeds had been prepared. 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. 4. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen stated there were two minor subdivisions and a request for a change to a planned unit development slated for the December 4, 2007, Planning Commission meeting. 5. REPORTS Liaison to Council • Commissioner Geng reported on matters considered and actions taken at the October 22, 2007, Regular City Council meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). Councilmember Callies reported on matters considered and actions taken at the November 5, 2007, Regular City Council meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). SLUC • No report was given. Other • Councilmember Callies asked if the Lakeshore Residential, L-R District allowed for a marina. Director Nielsen stated it allowed for water harboring of boats (i.e., a marina or yacht club) with many conditions CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 20 November 2007 Page 6 of 6 associated with that; all other uses were accessory or conditional. Callies then questioned if it was possible for the draft Interim C.U.P. to allow for the Shorewood Yacht Club to eventually be converted to a marina. Nielsen stated the way the resolution granting an Interim C.U.P. would be written would not allow for that. Chair Schmitt stated the L-R District regulations did not prohibit a marina. Schmitt then stated the Upper Minnetonka Yacht Club currently existed as a nonconforming use in the R-1C/S, Single- Family Residential/Shoreland zoning district. 6. ADJOURNMENT Gagne moved, Gniffke seconded, Adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of 20 November 2007 at 7:40 P.M. Motion passed 6/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Christine Freeman, Recorder