Loading...
031808 pl mn CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL CHAMBERS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD TUESDAY, 18 MARCH 2008 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Acting Chair Gniffke called the meeting to order at 7:02 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Acting Chair Gniffke; Commissioners Geng, Hutchins, and Ruoff; Planning Director Nielsen; and Council Liaison Woodruff Absent: Chair Schmitt; Commissioner Gagne APPROVAL OF MINUTES ? 19 February 2008 Hutchins moved, Geng seconded, Approving the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of 19 February 2008 as presented. Motion passed 4/0. 1. 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING – AMENDMENT OF WATERFORD P.U.D. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Applicant: Waterford Center LLP Location: 19905 Highway 7 Acting Chair Gniffke opened the Public Hearing at 7:03 P.M. He explained items recommended for approval that evening would be placed on a March 24, 2008, Regular City Council Meeting Agenda for further review and consideration. Director Nielsen stated the Waterford Shopping Center was located at 19905 State Highway 7. He explained the Waterford commercial element of the Waterford P.U.D. was approved in September 1990. Shorewood Resolution No. 100-90 specifically addressed two uses to be included in the center: 1) a convenience store with gas pumps; and 2) a family restaurant. The resolution set forth conditions as to how the two uses would be operated. In the case of the family restaurant, hours would be limited to between 7 A.M. and 11 P.M. and the restaurant would not eligible for any kind of liquor license. To date, no restaurant had occupied space in the Shopping Center since it was built. Nielsen stated the owner of Waterford Center LLP had recently requested an amendment to the original Waterford agreement that would allow the owner to market to potential tenants on leasing space for the expressed purpose of adding a family restaurant that could, if desired, serve beer and wine. The owner believed the opportunity to serve beer and wine would help attract a restaurant to the Center. The request was explained in a letter, dated 5 February 2008 from Mr. Palanisami (the owner), which was included in the meeting packet. He related the owner had stated he was not pursuing any specific tenant, but all of the potential tenants he had spoken with had expressed interest in wanting to serve beer and wine. Nielsen explained the P.U.D. process included three steps: 1) concept; 2) development; and 3) final plan. The applicant had requested concept and development stage approvals for the P.U.D. amendment. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 18 March 2008 Page 2 of 10 Nielsen explained when the Waterford Shopping Center was originally approved, a concern of residents had expressed concern that the restaurant may end up being more of bar (particularly a sports bar) than a restaurant if liquor was allowed to be served. Two things would probably preclude that from becoming the case – the hours for the restaurant were limited to 7:00 A.M. to 11:00 P.M., and the applicant had only requested a wine and intoxicating malt beverage (i.e., beer) license. The City had recently received correspondence from individuals in the area south of the Center (in particular the Waterford Townhomes). The individuals were open to a restaurant and almost unanimously wanted it limited with regard to liquor (which the beer and wine did to some degree); some individuals suggested the sale of beer and wine be limited to individuals who were at the restaurant to dine and that could be an option as the City had a number of types of liquor related licenses. Nielsen stated the applicant was not in attendance and he was not sure where he was as the applicant’s secretary had confirmed the time of the Public Hearing. He then stated he was some what surprised that there were not any residents present. Nielsen stated if the Planning Commission and the City Council agreed with the proposed amendment, Staff should be directed to prepare an amendment to the Waterford Planned Unit Development agreement and to the protective covenants recorded against the property. Those amendments would come back to the Council as the final plan for the application. In response to a question from Acting Chair Gniffke, Director Nielsen stated the only two on-sale liquor licenses in the City were for the Minnetonka Country Club and the American Legion which both had a club liquor license. Commissioner Hutchins questioned if the future tenant would have to apply for a liquor license as well as obtain a site plan approval. Director Nielsen stated the tenant would already have site plan approval because of the previous approval for the Center; the restaurant would occupy the space previously occupied by the sporting goods store. In response to a question from Acting Chair Gniffke, Director Nielsen stated to-date the applicant had not made any comment about a suggestion to limit the purchase of beer and wine to individuals who were at the restaurant to dine. There were discussions about other establishments that served beer and wine only to dinners. Joey Novas served beer and wine but it did not have a bar seating area, and D’Amico’s in Wayzata was the same. There were a couple of pizza places in Chanhassen that also served beer and wine. Acting Chair Gniffke stated he had spoken with residents in his neighborhood that would like to see a family-style like restaurant in the area. Council Liaison Woodruff stated the very preliminary drawing submitted for the proposed restaurant space indicated there would be 2300 square-feet of area for the dining, bar, and waiting area combined; and it also showed that 1400 square feet of that space would be for dining. He suggested a restriction be placed on the size of the bar area or the sale of beer and wine be restricted to individuals who are there to dine. He commented that Al and Almas had eight stools at its bar area intended as a staging area for people waiting to be seated at a table, which was probably similar to what potential tenants would want. Woodruff then stated the hours of operation for the existing convenience store with gas pumps were from 6:00 A.M. – midnight. He suggested the hours of operation for the restaurant be changed to 6:00 A.M. – CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 18 March 2008 Page 3 of 10 11:00 P.M.; that would allow a restaurant owner to serve an earlier breakfast to people who may stop for gas and want to have breakfast. With regard to a question from Councilmember Ruoff, Director Nielsen explained that deliveries to the restaurant would be in the back of the building. He noted when the City owned the Waterford Liquor Store (located next to the proposed space for a restaurant) the deliveries to that Store had been made in the back of the building. Therefore he did not foresee and additional impact on the residents behind the Center. Mr. Palanisami, the applicant, joined the meeting. Seeing no one present wishing to comment on this case, Acting Chair Gniffke opened and closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:17 P.M. Acting Chair Gniffke asked the applicant if he had any comments he wanted to make. He had none. Geng moved, Hutchins seconded, recommending approval of an amendment to the commercial element of the Waterford Planned Unit Development agreement (which would restrict the hours of operation for a restaurant to 6:00 A.M. – 11:00 P.M. and the sale of beer and liquor to individuals there to dine), and of an amendment to the protective covenants recorded against the Waterford commercial property. Motion passed 4/0. Mr. Palanisami apologized for being late but he had gotten lost. He suggested the City put a sign up at the intersection of Smithtown Road and County Road 19 indicating where City Hall was located. Acting Chair Gniffke closed the Public Hearing at 7:19 P.M. 2. 7:15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING – C.U.P. AMENDMENT Applicant: Minnetonka School District 276 Location: Minnewashta Elementary – 26350 Smithtown Road This item was rescheduled to an April 1, 2008, Planning Commission meeting. 3. 7:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING – C.U.P. FOR ACCESSORY SPACE OVER 1200 SQ. FT. Applicants: Stephen Doyle Location: 26785 Edgewood Road This item was discussed after Item 6 on the agenda. Acting Chair Gniffke opened the Public Hearing at 7:37 P.M., noting the procedures utilized in a Public Hearing. Director Nielsen stated Stephen Doyle owned the property at 26785 Edgewood Road. Mr. Doyle had applied for a conditional use permit to construct a detached garage. The floor area of the new garage would put the property in excess of 1200 square feet of accessory space, necessitating a conditional use permit. The new garage would replace an existing detached accessory building and would be located on the west side of the site. The property was zoned R-1A, Single-Family Residential and contained 2.5 acres of land. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 18 March 2008 Page 4 of 10 Nielsen reviewed the property survey which showed the location of the existing house and attached garage, as well as an existing shed which would be demolished. The proposed single-story detached garage would contain 1344 square feet of floor area. When that area was combined with the existing attached garage, the amount of accessory space on the site would total 2112 square feet. The house contained 2510 square feet of floor area above grade, not including the porch on the rear side of the house. Nielsen reviewed how Mr. Doyle’s request complied with the four criteria specified in Section 1201.03 Subd.2.d.(4) of the City’s Zoning Code for granting a conditional use permit for accessory space in excess of 1200 square feet. 1. The total area of accessory buildings (2112 square feet) did not exceed the floor area (2510 square feet not including the porch on the rear side of the house) above grade of the existing home. 2. The total area of accessory buildings did not exceed 10 percent of the minimum lot size for the R-1A zoning district (.10 x 40,000 = 4000 square feet). 3. The proposed garage would comply with R-1A setback requirements. Hardcover on the property would be well under 25 percent. 4. The architectural character of the new building would be the same as the existing house. The siding and roofing will match the house. Per Council Liaison Woodruff’s request, Director Nielsen reviewed a view of the area around the proposed garage and the surrounding buildings. The nearest neighbor had a large accessory building on the north side of his house, and that was approximately 120 feet away from the new building. Nielsen stated because the applicant’s request was considered to be consistent with the requirements of the City’s Zoning Code, Staff recommended that the conditional use permit be granted as requested. Director Nielsen stated that Mr. Doyle was present this evening to answer any questions the Commission may have. Seeing no one present wishing to comment on this case, Acting Chair Gniffke opened and closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:32 P.M. Commissioner Hutchins stated Staff had indicated that the siding and roofing showed vertical siding while the house had horizontal siding. Mr. Doyle stated the drawing was taken off of the internet; the siding would be horizontal and the same color as the siding on the house. In response to a question from Commissioner Ruoff, Mr. Doyle stated there would not be any grading required because of the slightly larger footprint of the proposed garage. A small amount of dirt may be required. In response to another question, Director Nielsen stated there was significant amount of ground between the garage and the neighbor’s property so he did not think drainage would be a problem. In response to a question from Commissioner Hutchins, Director Nielsen stated it was not necessary to replace the few trees that would have to be removed. It could be a condition of the conditional use permit, but the tree line softened the view of the building from the adjoining property. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 18 March 2008 Page 5 of 10 Hutchins moved, Ruoff seconded, recommending approval of a conditional use permit for accessory space over 1200 square feet for Stephen Doyle, 26785 Edgewood Road. Motion passed 4/0. Acting Chair Gniffke closed the Public Hearing at 7:46 P.M. 4. DISCUSS PLANNING DISTRICT 6 This item was rescheduled to an April 1, 2008, Planning Commission meeting. 5. DISCUSS COMP PLAN - ISSUES This item was discussed after Item 3 on the agenda. Nielsen stated in February the Commission had been provided with a copy of the issues sections of each chapter of the Comprehensive Plan (the Plan), and yesterday he had distributed a document (via email) which addressed updates Staff recommended to the issues sections. The updates included removing issues that had been resolved and adding new issues which should be addressed in the Plan. Nielsen reviewed the issues by chapter. Natural Resources The issues previously identified in the Plan tend to be ongoing, although some of them needed to be updated. For example, the recent decision by the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District (RPBCWD) to no longer handle permitting relative to the Wetland Conservation Act had resulted in the City delegating Local Government Unit authority for WCA permitting for lands inside Shorewood within the RPBCWD jurisdiction to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. That arrangement should be formalized in the Comprehensive Plan. The City was currently in the process of updating its Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan (CWRMP). Much of what was addressed in the CWRMP related to natural resource protection (e.g. surface water management, erosion control, etc.). Water supply and wastewater management tended to be community facility matters. The two plans must be consistent; the easiest way to accomplish that in the Plan would be to reference the CWRMP. Land Use The current edition of the Plan cited discrepancies between the Land Use Plan and the Shorewood Zoning District map. That issue was resolved when the map was updated to reflect and implement the City’s Land Use Plan. Housing variety and affordability continued to be an issue. The problem was there were limited, if any, good solutions to the problem given the relatively high land values and low density character of the community. Lake access issues had been addressed since the current Plan was adopted. For example, in 2007 there was an amendment to the Shorewood Yacht Club’s conditional use permit that would allow a percentage of boats kept at the SYC to be power boats. That should be referenced in the Plan. Long term land use issues for the area in which the SYC was located would be addressed in the Planning District 6 Area Plan. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 18 March 2008 Page 6 of 10 The Plan should specify the types of commercial businesses, primarily retail, the City would want to encourage in the area of Smithtown Crossing and along the County Road 19 corridor through Shorewood. The County Road 19 Corridor Study that was adopted addressed street issues, area identity, trails and utilities; but little or no reference was made regarding the types of commercial businesses desired. In that same area, the issue of redevelopment of existing commercial properties had been a topic of discussion. Transportation The issue of the County Road 19/Country Club Road intersection addressed in the Plan had been resolved. Although mass transit remained an issue, it appeared unlikely that any type of mass transit would be feasible for a long time given Shorewood’s low density and minimal demand. The County Road 19 Corridor Study set forth a concept plan for pedestrian/bicycle circulation, primarily in Planning District 6. The issue now was how to get it implemented (i.e. funded). Shorewood had joined with Tonka Bay and Orono in planning for a trail system that would connect the LRT Trail to the Dakota Rail Line in Orono and would also extend southward to the Smithtown Crossing area. The Transportation chapter of the Plan included a plan for the reconstruction of existing substandard streets. It allowed existing residential streets to be reconstructed to a width of less than 24 feet (the standard for new streets), but no less than Fire Code standards (20-foot traveled surface). A recent street project was moth-balled, due in part to residents who opposed to a 20-foot wide street. The City should reevaluate the current plan and change the policy if necessary. A number of “paper streets” currently existed in Shorewood. Paper streets were rights-of-way that were never platted as City streets and there may not have been intent to plat them. A complete inventory of those streets should be done, with some analysis as to whether any of them should be considered for vacation. Community Facilities Sanitary sewer had not been an issue for quite some time relative to capacity. The entire City was served with sanitary sewer service. What continued to be an issue was the maintenance and repair of the aging system. The Metropolitan Council was particularly interested in addressing inflow and infiltration (I&I). The current policies relative to municipal water expansion appear to be working well (provided there was not a desire to have City water throughout the City). Deficiencies in the existing water system that were noted in the Plan had been addressed in recent water improvement projects. The larger issue of water supply must be addressed – specifically, water conservation and possible future water treatment. By the time the Comprehensive Plan update was adopted the renovation of City Hall should be completed; that renovation should serve the community for many years to come. The City-owned property adjacent to City Hall should be addressed in the Plan. The public safety building needs should be well satisfied with the recent construction of the public safety facility in Shorewood and the facility in Deephaven. While master plans had been developed for all of Shorewood’s parks, the Park Commission had recommended that plans for Badger Field and Silverwood Park be updated. The Commission also recommended the installation of restrooms at Manor Park. The following comments or clarifications were made by Director Nielsen, that Commissioners, and Council Liaison Woodruff. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 18 March 2008 Page 7 of 10 In an attempt to minimize the construction of “McMansions”, there was a provision ? adopted in the Zoning Code which put a limit on the size a lot created by combining small lots could be. The R1-D District allowed lots as small as 10,000 square feet in area and in other areas, such as Minnetonka Manor, there were lots as small as 8,000 square feet in area. The R1-A District had larger lots and therefore there would be larger houses. The R1-C District had a 20,000 square foot area requirement, and the large houses constructed on those lots created a crowded appearance; hardcover requirements were an attempt to control the size to some degree. It could be appropriate to consider the floor- ratio to land- area approach to controlling house sizes in the future. It could also be appropriate to consider an approach where the foot print of a new house could not be greater than a specified percent increase over the average foot print of houses in the area. With regard to the Minnetonka Country Club property, if the property ceased to be a ? country club it would be zoned R1-A Single Family Residential with a minimal lot size of 40,000 square feet. The property was well over 100 acres in size, with some of the land being lowland. The current owner of the property had conveyed that he did not want to make any decisions about the future of his property at this time. The land was more valuable as residential property than as golf course. With regard to redevelopment of the Smithtown Crossing area and the County Road 19 ? corridor, the street signs at Smithtown Crossing should be made larger and consistent, and signs should be installed directing people to City Hall, the Southshore Center, to Public Works, and to the Public Safety Facility. There were two park-n-ride lots in the City. There was a small one on the north side of ? the parking lot at City Hall. There was another lot was located at Vine Hill next to Rapid Oil. There had to be strong justification for the City to spend funds to extend ? pedestrian/bicycle path from the LRT trail to the Smithtown Crossing. The path would have to go south on Country Road 19. When the City tried to apply the street reconstruction plan to the Amlee Road, Glen ? Road, and Manitou Lane street reconstruction project the residents objected to widening of streets in part because of the impact it would have had on the existing trees. The major reason the project was put on hold was the property owners would not grant the City the necessary easements. A few years ago, the City had implemented a plan for the televising and repair of the ? sections of the sanitary sewer system that were most likely to have problems. The Metropolitan Council encouraged more activity with regard to addressing inflow and infiltration (I&I). Although the City currently did not have an I&I problem, it was important to take a proactive approach to ensure a problem did not arise. The City did have an interceptor with Victoria, and the flow from Victoria that went through that interceptor was supposed to be monitored and accounted for. There were small areas where the City served residents in other communities (their sewers connected to the City’s sewer system) that did not go through an interceptor; that was called unmetered flow and should be monitored. The installation of City water was primarily on a demand basis. There had been a ? relatively recent situation where the Wedgewood Drive street reconstruction project was contingent on installing City water main as part of the project. Staff was currently working on the Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan ? which the Metropolitan Council required. The management of Loose Strife was addressed in the Plan. There was a method for ? eradicating Loose Strife that entailed the use of a very small beetle. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 18 March 2008 Page 8 of 10 The following issues were recommended to be added to the Plan during the review and discussion. 1. Land Use – The future of the Minnetonka Country Club property would be added to the chapter. 2. Land Use – Identification of controls to manage the development of “McMansions” would be added. 3. Land Use – The future uses for the Howard’s Point Marina property and surrounding area should be added. 4. Natural Resources – The issue of wildlife management should be added. 5. Natural Resources – The eradication of Buckthorn and diseased trees should be added. 6. 2008 WORK PROGRAM This item was discussed before Item 3 on the agenda. Director Nielsen reviewed the tentative Planning Commission 2008 Work Program plan which he distributed. The schedule reflected the dates the task would be worked on, who was responsible for completing a task (the Commission or Staff), and a report was a deliverable from the task. The majority of the program will focus on updates to the Comprehensive Plan. He reviewed the tasks and dates in the Plan (as detailed in a copy of the Work Program Plan). The highlights of the plan are as follows. Updates to the Comp Plan are estimated to be completed by late June, including the ? Planning District 6 Area Plan. A public information meeting would be scheduled for the first part of August, and a ? public hearing would be held shortly after that. The Comp Plan would be referred to adjacent communities for comment in September. ? The Comp Plan would be submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review and comment ? during October and early November. The remaining Planning District Area Plans would be reviewed and updated if needed ? from mid-September to mid-November. The Comp Plan would be adopted by the City in early December and published in late ? December. The City’s Zoning Code would be updated to reflect updated parking requirements and ? the annual variance discussion would occur in October. Monitoring of the Shorewood Yacht Club’s compliance with its conditional use permit would be completed in September. Changes to fees for after-the-fact zoning applications would be considered in October. ? Changes to the allowable hours for off-sale liquor sales would be considered in April. ? Nielsen suggested the Planning Commission and City Council have a joint meeting to discuss the Comprehensive Plan issues by the end of April or early May. Council Liaison Woodruff suggested another joint meeting be scheduled to review the Plan when it is close to its final form and before it was submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review. Nielsen recommended the format for the Public Information Meeting be an open house, similar to the one used the last time this effort was done. Each chapter in the Plan would be set up at a particular station where a Commissioner or staff member would be available to answer any questions the public may have. Nielsen explained the Shorewood Liquor Store requested the City change its allowable hours for off-sale liquor sales to be consistent with those in the State Statute for Monday – Thursday (the State allowed the CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 18 March 2008 Page 9 of 10 off-sale of liquor until 10:00 P.M. but the City Code only allowed it until 8:00 P.M.). The possibility for double fees for after-the-fact permits for any zoning application would be considered; currently, the only activity that was subject to basically a double fee was building code violations. Nielsen then explained there was only one Commission meeting scheduled for August because he would be on vacation. There was no meeting scheduled for the first Tuesday in September because in the past few years the Commission had decided not to have a meeting after a three-day weekend. He suggested that at the end of June, the Commission discuss whether or not it felt additional meetings should be scheduled in August and September. In response to a question from Commissioner Ruoff, Director Nielsen explained that when the Comprehensive Plan was approved by the Metropolitan Council approximately two years ago it reviewed it thoroughly; therefore, he did not think there would be many significant changes requested. The Metropolitan Council had implemented some new mandates since the Plan was last approved which had to be addressed. There were different groups at the Metropolitan Council that would review different chapters in the Plan. In response to another question, Nielsen stated the Plan had to be updated every five years; the last time the Plan was submitted to the Metropolitan Council late and there were changes that had to be made after its review. Nielsen explained that the Comprehensive Plan and the Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan must be consistent; therefore, that would probably be accomplished in the Comprehensive Plan through reference to the Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan. 7. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. 8. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA This was discussed after Item 3 on the agenda. Director Nielsen stated there had been a conditional use permit amendment, a setback variance, and a request to change the allowable hours for off-sale liquor sales slated for the April 1, 2008, Planning Commission meeting. The Study Session portion of that meeting would be devoted to discussing Planning District 6. 9. REPORTS • Liaison to Council Councilmember Hutchins reported on matters considered and actions taken at the March 10, 2008, Regular City Council meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). Council Liaison Woodruff reported on matters considered and actions taken at the March 17, 2008, Regular City Council meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). • SLUC No report was given. • Other None. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 18 March 2008 Page 10 of 10 10. ADJOURNMENT Hutchins moved, Geng seconded, Adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of 18 March 2008 at 8:45 P.M. Motion passed 4/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Christine Freeman, Recorder