Loading...
PC-02-05-14 CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL CHAMBERS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2014 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chair Geng called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Geng; Commissioners Charbonnet, Davis, Garelick; Labadie, and Maddy; Council Liaison Sundberg; and Planning Director Nielsen Absent: Commissioner Muehlberg APPROVAL OF AGENDA Davis moved, Maddy seconded, approving the agenda for February 5, 2014, as presented. Motion passed 6/0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES  Deferred 1. 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING – SETBACK VARIANCE/VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS Applicant: Dan and Trina Volbrecht Location: 5770 Smithtown Circle Chair Geng opened the Public Hearing at 7:01 P.M., noting the procedures used in a Public Hearing. He stated this evening the Planning Commission is going to consider a request for variances for Dan and Trina Volbrecht, 5770 Smithtown Circle. He explained the Commission is comprised of residents of the City of Shorewood who are serving as volunteers on the Commission. They are appointed by the City Council. The Commission’s role is to help develop the factual record for an application and to make a non-binding recommendation to the City Council. The recommendation is advisory only. He noted that if the Planning Commission makes a recommendation this evening this item will go before the City Council on February 24, 2014. Director Nielsen reviewed the City’s criteria for granting variances. All four of the following criteria have to be met. 1. The applicant has to prove that it would be a reasonable use of property. The first thing that is asked when considering a variance is if it can be done without one. If it can it is extremely difficult to warrant granting a variance. 2. The circumstances have to be unique to the property. That means that the owner faces problems that other property owners in the zoning district do not. The question comes up about whether or not the variance would create a precedent for other properties. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING February 5, 2014 Page 2 of 10 3. The circumstances cannot be caused by the property owner including actions of the previous owners of the property. 4. The variance cannot alter the essential character of the area. Presidence and compliance with zoning and other codes are taken into consideration. Nielsen explained Trina and Dan Volbrecht own the property located at 5770 Smithtown Circle and they have requested a couple of variances. The property is zoned R-1C, Single-Family Residential and it contains 24,713 square feet of area; the minimum size lot for this zoning district is 20,000 square feet. The property is a corner lot, located in the northwest quadrant of Smithtown Road and Smithtown Circle. The property is occupied by the Volbrechts’ home, which has an attached two-car garage facing Smithtown Circle, a small shed at the rear of the property, and the structure in question. The Volbrechts were issued a zoning violation notice late in 2013 for constructing a vinyl storage structure in their rear yard without a permit and in violation of Shorewood zoning regulations. The structure does not comply with requirements for the rear yard setback and side yard setback abutting the street, and it is constructed out of vinyl not out of materials similar to the principle dwelling. With regard to zoning requirements, in the R-1C district the rear yard setback is 40 feet, the front yard setback is 35 feet (which is the Smithtown Circle side) and everything complies with that. The setback for a side yard abutting the street is treated the same as the front (35 feet), and there is a typical 10 foot side yard setback on the northerly side of the property. The reason for having setbacks is to establish minimum open and/or green spaces on any given lot and to create a continuity of open space. The City went to great length to address building materials in its Zoning Ordinance. The intent is to ensure houses and their accessory structures meet a high standard of design and building material. The 14.5 foot by 32 foot structure is only 32.3 feet from the rear of the lot (40 feet is required) and 15.6 feet from the public right- of-way (ROW) for Smithtown Road (35 feet is required). With regard to variances, the State law changed a few years ago from a standard of “undue hardship” to “practical difficulties”. The City changed it zoning regulations to comply with that change. Nielsen reviewed how the request does or does not comply with the four criteria for granting variances. 1. Reasonable Use – A detached garage is considered to be a reasonable use provided it is located on the property as it is supposed to be. The alternative structure locations exhibit in the staff report shows that an accessory structure similar in size to what they are proposing could easily be situated in at least three different locations on the property that would not require a setback variance. 2. Circumstances Unique to the Property – There is nothing unique about the property in question with respect to this situation. Corner lots in all zoning districts are subject to the “side yard abutting the street” setback requirement. The size of the lot is greater than the minimum lot area for the R-1C District (24,713 square feet vs. 20,000). The house complies with the setback requirements. There is ample room on the property within the buildable area to locate a detached accessory structure. 3. Circumstances Not Caused by Owner – The Volbrechts did not build the existing house on the lot. But, they did inherit the actions of the owner that did. In this case, a different house design CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING February 5, 2014 Page 3 of 10 could easily have accommodated a three-car or larger garage. The previous owner brought this “practical difficulty” on him or herself. 4. The Variance Will Not Alter the Essential Character of the Area – If this were approved it would be very difficult to deny similar requests, both with respect to open space and construction quality. That would have an adverse effect on the Zoning Code and the residential character of Shorewood. Although the structure is good quality as far as vinyl structures go, it is far from the quality of a building that can comply with Building Code requirements. In order to obtain a building permit the manufacturer would have to demonstrate that the structure can comply with snow and wind loads required by the State Building Code and there is good reason to doubt that the structure would comply. He noted that based on analysis of the case staff does not recommended the variances be granted. Approval would set an extremely undesirable precedent. Assuming the Planning Commission and Council agree, the applicants should be given 15 days to remove the violating structure. Nielsen stated the applicants are present to state their case. Dan Volbrecht, 5770 Smithtown Circle, stated he and his wife Trina first want to provide a little background on their property. He distributed four handouts to the Planning Commission to provide a visual perspective of the property. He explained they bought the property in 2000. One of the things they liked about the property is the wooded privacy it afforded in the back of the lot. He noted they have lost many trees to Dutch elm disease. He explained after purchasing the property they quickly discovered that during the snow melt in the spring there was a stormwater runoff problem on the southwest corner of their property. They added about 75 feet of extension near the culvert on the southern portion of the property to the corner of the property so the runoff would drain through the property properly. He noted they have invested in making improvements to the property both financially and emotionally. He stated they have a berm and a fence along the south end of the property for privacy purposes. Mr. Volbrecht stated this has been a learning experience for them. They had not known that a permit was required for what they consider to be a non-permanent detached structure or that there was a size restriction on it. He displayed one of the handouts showing the approximate location of their vinyl accessory structure and the setbacks as well as other possible locations for that rectangular structure or a 24 foot by 24 foot square structure. They do not think it would be reasonable to have to put the structure in the middle of their yard because of setbacks and openness. And, it would create more clutter in the center their yard. To make something like that happen they would have to take down some trees. He then stated with regard to the uniqueness of their property he explained the side yard abutting the street setback of 35 feet does confine the buildable space on the property. It creates the situation where they would have to put the structure directly in their back yard. He displayed a map of sorts showing properties within 500 feet of their property. There are only a couple others that have the same setbacks because of a corner lot situation. There is an acute angle in the back southwest corner of their property and that would force the structure further into the buildable space. He explained there is a 35 foot setback on the side abutting the street and a 40 foot setback along the rear of the property. There is also a 20 foot easement on the north property line. He is not sure why that is there. That basically confines the buildable space to the walls of their house through the western portion of their property. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING February 5, 2014 Page 4 of 10 Mr. Volbrecht stated they would like to have their variance requests approved and noted they have invested a lot in trying to make the current location of the structure work. They believe there are some unique aspects about their property. Seeing no one present to comment on the case, Chair Geng opened and closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:25 P.M. Commissioner Garelick stated he spent five years on the City of St. Louis Park Planning Commission. During that time he spent a lot of time driving in alleys to see what back yards were like. He saw lots of blue colored tarp in the yards. He thought that aesthetically affected the neighborhoods. He noted he appreciates the work the Volbrechts have done to their yard. He expressed concern that their structure will change the character of the area and that it would establish a precedent. He noted that he does not want to see a lot of blue tarps in Shorewood. That would not fit. He stated he will vote to recommend the application be denied. Commissioner Davis asked the Volbrechts how big their boat. Mr. Volbrecht stated it is 21 feet long. Davis then asked if the structure comes down in the summer. Mr. Volbrecht explained it was just put in the fall of 2013. Ms. Volbrecht explained their original intent was to build another garage until they learned what the setback requirements were. They would have had a permanent structure basically in the middle of their back yard and that would not have looked good. They thought they were being compliant by having a non-permanent structure because they have seen them in their neighborhood. Where she walks their dog though Freeman Park she sees non-permanent structures all over the place. Although they may not be nice they are better than tarps draped over boats which can be seen all over their neighborhood. Chair Geng stated he appreciates the time and effort the Volbrechts have spent to keep up their property. Unfortunately that has no bearing on this application or on the variances. He then stated the City has adopted a Code for the orderly maintenance of properties and the setback requirements are in place to provide some continuity of open space. He expressed concern that granting these variance requests would set a precedent for future similar requests. The City Code then becomes subject to exceptions rather than uniformity. He stated he appreciates why the applicants don’t want to place the structure inside of the setbacks but that is what the Code requires. He then stated he does not think the request meets any of the criteria for “practical difficulty”. He noted that he will vote to recommend denying the application. Commissioner Davis asked if the City is doing anything to try and pursue those types of structures throughout the City. Director Nielsen stated the City has not made any attempt to go looking for them. Nielsen explained the City goes after them on a complaint basis. Davis asked if someone complained about the Volbrechts’ structure. Nielsen stated he would have to check the inspection slip. It is possible the Building Inspector just saw the structure when he was driving. Davis indicated the property kitty- corner the Volbrechts’ property could use some inspection. Davis noted she had a boat as well and had a structure that had to come down as well. She stated her boat is now stored in a secure wooded area on her property and that she had to remove trees to be able to store it there. She noted that State law states that if something can be done from a practical perspective a variance is not warranted. She stated she will also vote to deny the request but she would recommend they take it down after winter is over so their boat remains covered and so that they have time to think about what they are going to do. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING February 5, 2014 Page 5 of 10 Ms. Volbrecht stated because the ground is frozen it would not be possible to take it down now. Commissioner Davis stated from her perspective the structure seems like an awfully big structure for a 21 foot boat. It is about 10 feet longer than they need. Mr. Volbrecht stated there is a snowmobile trailer in there as well. Davis indicated they need another solid structure for their stuff. Davis asked the Volbrechts what their neighbors think about the structure. Ms. Volbrecht stated they are still open to building a real garage. She then stated with the berm and fence there she does not understand the green space continuation. It looks less organized than if it were butting up next to a fence. Commissioner Davis stated the Volbrechts have a storage canopy for a boat and snowmobile and they have a 100 square foot shed. It’s clear they need more storage space. A solid structure could be built on the back of the property and integrated with the landscaping. From her vantage point it is not an insurmountable design problem. Commissioner Charbonnet stated he supports Commissioner Davis’s recommendation that they be given until the end of winter to take the structure down. He then stated he will vote to recommend denial of the application mainly because it would set a precedent. Director Nielsen stated the violation has been suspended for the moment and the Planning Commission can recommend suspending it longer. Commissioner Labadie suggested setting a specific date by which it has to be removed. There was Planning Commission consensus to recommend that the structure be taken down by May 15, 2014. Maddy moved, Labadie seconded, recommending denial of the two variance requests for Dan and Trina Volbrecht, 5570 Smithtown Circle, and that the vinyl structure be removed by May 15, 2014. Motion passed 6/0. The Volbrechts noted they are not sure they can make the February 24, 2014, Council meeting when their application will be considered. Chair Geng closed the Public Hearing at 7:37 P.M. 2. DISCUSS MILL STREET AND GALPIN LAKE ROAD TRAILS OPEN HOUSE Director Nielsen explained the Planning Commission held an open house on January 21, 2014, for the Mill Street and Galpin Lake Road trail segments. He thought the turnout was relatively good on a very cold night. The response to information from the feasibility studies was very positive. One individual was concerned about the side of the road the Galpin Lake Road trail segment will be on because his house is located closer to the road than most of his neighbors. Very few comment sheets were filled out that evening. A number of emails were sent to the City following the open house. The Planning Commission was provided a copy of them this evening. He clarified he is not looking for action on them this evening. He stated there are some ideas that were conveyed that he thought the Commission should discuss. For example, one resident brought up the idea CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING February 5, 2014 Page 6 of 10 of planting some screening along the section of trail along Highway 7. Staff will look into that but it is a very, very tight space. He noted the comments will be posted on the City’s website and if there were questions asked staff will answer them. He stated one person asked why the Mill Street trail segment was even being considered when it would not connect to a trail in the City of Excelsior. They did not understand that it would connect to the trail in the City of Chanhassen. He noted that the Mill Street segment has no funding at this time. Nielsen stated that during the February 8, 2014, Council and staff retreat there will be discussion regarding what to do about the unfunded trails. Only two more trail segments are funded in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) – the Smithtown Road east sidewalk/trail segment from the LRT to County Road 19 is funded in 2015 and the Galpin Lake Road trail segment is funded in 2014. Commissioner Garelick asked how the trails are funded. Director Nielsen explained the City has used a number of funding sources so far. The City received a grant from Hennepin County for approximately 25 percent of the cost of the County Road 19 trail segment. The rest of the funding for that came out of the Trail Fund. The proceeds from the operation of and sale of the City’s liquor operations were used for trails. The City will use some Minnesota State Aid (MSA) funds to help fund the trails because that funding can be used for trails along MSA routes. When a person buys gasoline about a certain portion of the tax on that goes into the MSA fund and it is distributed to cities with populations of 5,000 or more for improvements to MSA routes or trails near MSA routes. Assessing for trails is not being considered. Some of the stormwater improvements made as part of trails projects will be paid for out of the Stormwater Management Fund. Commissioner Garelick asked what Excelsior’s position is about connecting to abutting communities trail systems. Director Nielsen stated he thought Excelsior wants to do that. Nielsen explained that Shorewood and Excelsior jointly applied for a grant from Hennepin County to do the Mill Street trail segment feasibility study. Excelsior chose not to do the study at that time for a variety of reasons. He indicated the County was disappointed Excelsior did not move forward with the study because it would like to have that segment next to the County road done. Director Nielsen stated there is a gap on the Chanhassen side of both proposed trail segments. Chanhassen’s trail ends just short of its border with Shorewood. Chair Geng stated a couple of the residents along Galpin Lake Road had expressed concerns about traffic where the trail would end near Excelsior. He asked Director Nielsen if they are real concerns. Nielsen responded they are. Nielsen stated in one of the comments the City received the person asked if there could be an overpass at County Road 19. Nielsen noted that is a Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) and Hennepin County item because it is a State highway going over to a County road. There is no reason the City cannot support that. He then noted there is a signaled crosswalk at that intersection. Nielsen stated when people walk up Galpin Lake Road some of them cross the Highway there albeit very dangerous. Geng asked if an overpass could possibly be funded out of the Legacy Amendment funds. Nielsen stated that funding seems to be used for a lot of things. Nielsen noted MnDOT built tunnels under Highway 7 further west of the intersection. Commissioner Davis stated when there are trails on both sides of a MnDOT roadway reconstruction project a tunnel is constructed. Commissioner Davis commented residents seem to be more supportive of constructing trails in the City. There is not resistance like there had been in the past. She asked if the Smithtown Road east segment will be a nice sidewalk as well. Director Nielsen stated he assumes it will be a sidewalk as well and that the outstanding question is which side of the roadway it will be located on. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING February 5, 2014 Page 7 of 10 Chair Geng asked what the timeframe is for doing the Galpin Lake Road trail segment. Director Nielsen stated currently the hope is to seek Council approval for the design during April, and noted that he thought more easements will be needed for that. 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR 4. OLD BUSINESS / NEW BUSINESS Commissioner Davis stated she would like to revisit the vinyl structures all over town and clarified that she is not suggesting the City go after them. She sees junk all over town with tarps and Fleet Farm tents. She cited the example of the little house that is in the railroad right-of-way (ROW) with the fish house, tents and extra garage on it. Then there is the one with the permanent tent over a boat in the driveway. Commissioner Maddy stated it almost seems unfair that the couple who had requested the variances and have invested in their property probably won’t have their variances granted for the reasons the Planning Commission discussed. Director Nielsen suggested publishing an article in the City’s newsletter and on its website informing residents that canopies over things like boats are not allowed. That might get residents to call in and file a complaint. Commissioner Maddy stated maybe the article could say that Council directed staff to do a sweep of the City on, for example, June 1, 2014. That could possibly incent residents to remove those things in violation. Commissioner Davis stated they would have until the end of the 2014 boating season to figure out what they want to do with their boats. Director Nielsen stated there are a lot of boats stored on residential properties and most of them do not have a canopy over them. He noted that residents can have their boats on their driveway. Commissioner Davis asked if the Volbrechts’ fence pole height is in compliance. Director Nielsen stated part of addressing the violation that they will have to shorten the poles. Commissioner Davis stated the City should publish an article on accessory structures. Chair Geng suggested dovetailing that with information about the zoning permits. 5. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen stated the developer for the proposed Summit Woods planned unit development (PUD) submitted an application for the Development Stage approval of that project on the first Tuesday in January. It was rejected because it was not complete. The City had ten days to review the application. Commissioner Davis asked what was missing from the application. Director Nielsen stated the City had asked for more information about soils and the architecture. He clarified that the City does not dictate the architecture. He stated the City knows they will have architectural covenants as part of the project and the City wants to see them. Their proposed drainage CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING February 5, 2014 Page 8 of 10 solution was not adequate so they provided more information and changed the drainage solution to be behind the houses. The City prefers the runoff flow towards Galpin Lake Road rather than Summit Avenue. The City asked them to add more detail to the grading plan. He explained that he met with one of residents in that neighborhood earlier in the day. The resident seemed pleased that the City was pushing for those things. Because someone has a reason to believe there is an issue of perched water tables so the City is having them do a soil test for that. Director Nielsen stated if the application for the Summit Woods Planned Unit Development (PUD) Development Stage is complete the public hearing for it will be on the Planning Commission’s March 4, 2014, meeting agenda. A minor subdivision and a public hearing for a conditional use permit (C.U.P.) for accessory space over 1,200 square feet are also slated for that agenda. Those two items will be placed before the Summit Woods PUD. Commissioner Davis stated when she went through the packet of materials for the February 8, 2014, Council and staff retreat there is agenda item regarding Summit Avenue roadway improvement alternatives. She then stated she does not believe four new gigantic houses can be built at the top of Summit Avenue and not have a road. Director Nielsen noted that the project would widen the roadway in front of the project area. He stated during meetings on the Summit Woods PUD Concept Plan residents have stated Summit Avenue is hazardous today. If that project went away tomorrow the City would still need to do something to that roadway. He then stated he thinks the residents like the roadway the way it is; they do not want it changed. Chair Geng stated the residents play up the hazard of Summit Avenue yet oppose any changes to it. Director Nielsen stated Summit Avenue is quaint; it is picturesque. Commissioner Davis stated those people who are at the bottom of Summit Avenue are not happy because of all of the runoff that runs down that roadway and onto their properties. Commissioner Maddy noted a typical urban block in a city like Minneapolis has one single-lane alley to serve 26 properties. And, there are way less than 26 properties along Summit Avenue. Director Nielsen stated if some of the issues that were raised during discussions about the Summit Wood PUD concept plan are addressed, if some decent landscaping is put in and if the additional runoff does not affect any residential properties adversely then he thinks in time people will end up thinking the project is not too bad. Commissioner Davis stated when the foliage is off the trees she marvels how steep that hill is when she is driving by on Galpin Lake Road. She commented she would not ski down a hill that steep. Director Nielsen stated the majority of the residents in that neighborhood do not go up or down Summit Avenue in the winter. He then stated that the City had not heard complaints about Summit Avenue for many years until this project came about and the residents complained about roadway. There had been a time when the City of Chanhassen took care of that roadway when it plowed Hummingbird Road. After hearing the complaints about Summit Avenue the Shorewood Public Works Department has made a concerted effort to make sure it is clear and that sand is put down. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING February 5, 2014 Page 9 of 10 6. REPORTS • Liaison to Council Council Liaison Sundberg reported on the February 3, 2014, City Council special meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). She stated that during the February 8, 2014, Council and staff retreat there will be discussion about the Southshore Community Center. She noted that she cannot attend the retreat because she has to go to a funeral. She went on to state that Director Nielsen told her the Planning Commission is going to be discussing potential renewable energy issues. She noted that she was pleased to hear that. She stated a lot of communities have various residential solar energy issues. She asked the Commission to talk about what uses the community has for solar energy. The results of the resident survey the City conducted a few years ago indicated the residents have a lot of concern about environmental issues. She stated there are many incentives available and financing options available for alternative energy (some would be very risky for the community and some would have limited risk). She commented there are consultants that deal with just solar and wind energy and they know the technology and the financing options that are available. Also, there are consultants and vendors that it would be best to avoid. She asked the Commission to discuss if there are some modest things that could be considered. She stated she thought there are other members of Council who also would like the Commission to look into alternative energy. Commissioner Davis stated the City of Duluth has a fantastic composting site. She is not sure there is room for one in the City. She then stated Carver County has a program where residents can get a $70 dollar Smith and Hawken yard composter for $25. The composter looks nice and it was large enough to generate enough compost for a year from a family of four. Chair Geng stated he does not think any of the neighboring communities have room for a composting site either. Maybe the City could partner with other communities. Council Liaison Sundberg stated solar gardens are popular. She has heard pros and cons about them and is not sure it would be a good idea. Maybe the City could partner on such an initiative. She stated she would like to build more cooperation with the neighboring communities. Chair Geng stated it is about economics and that Shorewood is the largest South Lake community. Geng suggested revisiting the GreenStep initiative. Director Nielsen stated that is on the Planning Commission’s 2014 work program. Director Nielsen stated he and Mayor Zerby met with some solar people and they had an interesting proposal that might work in Badger Park and that could possibly pick up two steps in that initiative. Geng asked if there have been any inquiries about the Smithtown Crossing redevelopment possibility. Director Nielsen stated he and Mayor Zerby met in late December 2013 with representatives from a company that could pull the entire project together – a senior housing component and a commercial element. He had given them a copy of the study and highlighted it for them. They seemed excited about it at that time. He has not heard back from them recently. The City has received some inquiries about the American Legion’s extra lot. That would be a tough piece to do by itself. Because it is up against the residential boundary and therefore has a 50 foot setback on a 100-foot-wide lot. There have been a few inquiries about the Legion’s corner lot. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING February 5, 2014 Page 10 of 10 • SLUC None. • Other None. 7. ADJOURNMENT Davis moved, Maddy seconded, Adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of February 5, 2014, at 8:20 P.M. Motion passed 6/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Christine Freeman, Recorder