Loading...
08-06-19 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL CHAMBERS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD TUESDAY, AUGUST 6, 2019 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chair Maddy called the meeting to order at 7:01 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Maddy; Commissioners Eggenberger, Gault and Riedel; Planning Director Darling; and, Council Liaison Siakel Absent: Commissioner Gorham 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Chair Maddy asked for there to be an item added to the agenda to update the liaison schedule for reporting to the Council. Planning Director Darling stated that it will be added under Other Business. Riedel moved, Eggenberger seconded, approving the agenda for August 6, 2019, as amended. Motion passed 4/0. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES  July 2, 2019 Gault moved, Maddy seconded, approving the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of July 2, 2019, as presented. Motion passed 2/0/2 (Riedel and Eggenberger abstained). 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS Chair Maddy explained the Planning Commission is comprised of residents of the City of Shorewood who are serving as volunteers on the Commission. The Commissioners are appointed by the City Council. The Commission’s role is to help the City Council in determining zoning and planning issues. One of the Commission’s responsibilities is to hold public hearings and 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. A. PUBLIC HEARING – ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENTS REMOVING BONDS AS PERFORMANCE GUARANTEES Chair Maddy opened the Public Hearing at 7:04 P.M. noting the procedures used in a Public Hearing. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING August 6, 2019 Page 2 of 6 Planning Director Darling explained that this is a draft ordinance that removes bonds as an acceptable financial guarantee for developers with performance agreements or development contracts. She stated that bonds have become very difficult to seize when developers fail to perform so the City is looking for cash deposits or letters of credit which are much easier to use when needed. She noted that these proposed changes are simply housekeeping and proactive, rather than a reaction to a particular incident with a developer. Staff is recommending approval of this amendment. She explained that staff is recommending this same change over a number of sections of city code, but the Planning Commission must review changes to the Zoning Code text. Commissioner Eggenberger asked why a developer would want to use a bond rather than the cash or letter of credit. Planning Director Darling stated that bond are cheaper alternatives than the other options. Commissioner Eggenberger asked when the proposed change would take effect and if the developers would be given warning ahead of time of the deadline. Planning Director Darling stated that staff has already been using mostly letters of credit and cash deposits with developers. Commissioner Gault asked about the dollar amount guidelines in the City Code because some of them don’t say anything. He suggested that every instance be given an amount because there is inconsistency in the language throughout the Code. Planning Director Darling stated that this guarantee is for all the outstanding improvements and there is a requirement that their engineer give the City a list of all the outstanding improvements with a dollar amount attached to each item. She stated that then the City Engineer will look it over and make sure it is consistent with the proposed improvements. Commissioner Gault reiterated that he would like the language to be consistent and feels that will also make the Code more enforceable. He stated that he also thinks this would give more flexibility to the City to ask for more money if the condition is warranted. Commissioner Eggenberger suggested more generic language such as “in an amount to be determined by the City” so there isn’t a problem with numbers being too low or too high. The Commission discussed removing self-storage facilities from this section. Chair Maddy opened the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:17 P.M. There being no public testimony, Chair Maddy closed the Public Hearing at 7:17 PM. Riedel moved, Eggenberger seconded, recommending approval of ORDINANCE 569, “An Ordinance Approving an Amendment to Chapters 90, 1201 and 1202 of City Code to Remove Bonds as an Acceptable Financial Guarantee, AND removing the Self-Storage facility provision because it is redundant; cleaning up the language to remove dollar amounts; add language that more clearly reflects that the amount will be determined by the City; and that the word “Bond” be replaced by “Performance Guarantees”. Motion passed 4/0. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING August 6, 2019 Page 3 of 6 4. OTHER BUSINESS A. VARIANCE TO BUILD ON A SUBSTANDARD LOT AND SETBACK VARIANCE Applicants: Mike and Jane Schlangen Location: 27120 Edgewood Road Planning Director Darling stated that the applicant is proposing to demolish the existing home, detached garage and shed and construct a new home with an attached garage. She explained that the new home would be three feet, three inches from the east property line, five feet from the west property line and the side-yard setback would be eight feet, three inches. She stated that the applicants are proposing that their mechanical equipment would be located along the west property line as well as a sidewalk that could connect their deck to the street side of the house. She reviewed the existing setback requirements and noted that the applicant has stated that the proposed plans would reduce the impervious surface on the property. Staff has reviewed this request and found that practical difficulties exist because of the size and shape of the lot. She explained that the applicant could not construct a home that would meet the required setbacks. She stated that with the conditions listed in the staff report as well as some additional information the engineers have requested, staff is recommending approval. Commissioner Riedel asked about easements for public utilities. Planning Director Darling stated that there were none granted when this property was subdivided. She explained that the property was originally created in 1881 and then further subdivided later to create this parcel as well as a few others in the neighborhood. Commissioner Gault asked about the drainage flow because it looks like it will drain into the adjacent property. Planning Director Darling stated that is the existing condition and they are trying to allow the water to continue flowing along its natural path. She stated that is one of the things that the City Engineer would like more information regarding to ensure that the culverts are adequately sized. Chair Maddy noted that Edgewood Road cuts across their property and asked how that works. Planning Director Darling stated that the road was constructed after the property was platted so it is called a prescriptive right-of-way which means that the public continues to have rights to cross the property. Dan Buerman, DCB Designs, noted that the existing building was used as a seasonal cabin by the applicants. He explained that they have recently retired and are now looking to update the home. He stated that the original plan was to reuse the existing structure but because of an incident where the pipes burst, there was substantial mold, so a decision was made to construct a completely new home. He noted that the applicant has 16 siblings, so the home is proposed to have room for visitors but is still fairly modest. He stated that the existing water flow is a natural flow and he does not think there are any existing culverts in place. He stated that he expects the flow to remain the same with the proposed plans. Susie O’Donnell 27100 Edgewood Road, stated that she and her husband have lived on the property next door to this one for 25 years. She stated that they like the neighbors and are hopeful that they can build a nice house on their lot. She stated that their lot is almost identical to the applicants. She described the size of the home proposed in comparison to their home. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING August 6, 2019 Page 4 of 6 She stated that if this home is built as proposed they will lose light as well as a view of the lagoon. She stated that their patio that looks out to the lake will come very close to the new two-story home that is proposed and will also lose quite a bit of late afternoon sun because of the height of the home. She reviewed other areas where her home will be affected by this home and noted that it was not the proximity of the home that concerns them, but that it will be two- stories high. She stated that they also believe that there will be a problem with drainage especially with the increased elevation of the paver driveway. Commissioner Riedel stated that the drainage issue may be taken care of with the culverts. Ms. O’Donnell stated that they also have concerns because they wanted to add living space to their home in 2003 and applied for variances with the City. She stated that they had the support of the previous owners of this home for their plans and the City denied their request. She stated that they do want the applicants to get a new home, but they are concerned about the impact on their view and drainage. She stated that they are also concerned with fairness because their proposed plans were much more modest than what is being proposed for this property. She reiterated that they would like the applicants to build a nice, new house, but they have concerns about the proposed plans. Chair Maddy stated that the City cannot dictate views or how they will change as long as there is access to light and air. He stated that staff has already expressed concerns about the drainage, so that will be addressed moving forward. Planning Director Darling stated that she believes the City Engineer was looking at the possibility of using sheet flow across the driveway rather than using culverts so the drainage would not be concentrated and would follow the same natural path towards the lagoon. She stated that she did not believe the driveway grade will be raised based on the information the City has received thus far. She noted that the City will need to see more detailed drainage plans. Ms. O’Donnell stated that the paver driveway elevation says it is at 935 feet and there are areas to the east of the driveway that are about 932 feet. She stated that she assumed that meant that they would build up the driveway to the street level. Mr. Buerman explained the existing grade and the proposed plans. He stated that they were planning for a very shallow culvert, but has gotten the impression that it may not be needed because they may be able to use a six-inch drain tile and sheet flow over the driveway. Chair Maddy asked for more information about the pervious pavers. Mr. Buerman explained that it is 40% pervious. He noted that grass or gravel would be placed between the pavers and within the openings. Commissioner Riedel stated that the pervious pavers are controversial because they require a lot of maintenance so they remain pervious. Mr. Buerman stated that the homeowners understand that they require maintenance and would rather have it paved, but the hardcover situation was critical on the property so they chose the pervious pavers. Commissioner Gault asked about the decision to move the new home further back from the lake than the existing home. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING August 6, 2019 Page 5 of 6 Mr. Buerman stated that they pulled the home back twelve feet partly because of the neighbors to the east and allowed them a wider view. He stated that they did try to take into account their neighbors and their concerns. He stated that he did not think this is an extravagant home but does need to be large enough for the applicant’s family to come and visit. Chair Maddy noted that Ms. O’Donnell had brought up the issue of fairness with the previous variance and asked Planning Director Darling if she had any information on the situation. Planning Director Darling stated that at the time, there was concern that what they were proposing was more than what that particular lot could support. She noted that the standards for variances have been changed since the time that the O’Donnell’s submitted their application (2003). Commissioner Gault asked if there would be any additional fire protection required along the eastern wall because of the proximity to the other home. Planning Director Darling stated that the Zoning Code has additional requirements at three feet and at five feet but noted that a deck is not subject to those requirements. Commissioner Riedel asked about increasing the non-conformity and believes that the proposal slightly improves the non-conformity due to the amount of hardcover. He asked if adding an extra story was an increase in non-conformity. Planning Director Darling stated that the second story would require a variance even if it was the same footprint. Chair Maddy stated that in the past, pervious pavement has not been given credit. Planning Director Darling stated that there is a three-part test that requires air, water and vegetation to pass through for it to be allowed. She stated that this particular product passes the test and is 40% pervious. Commissioner Riedel stated that the concerns from the neighbors are well taken and he agreed that the variance will impact the neighbor because it is going from a one story to a two-story home. He stated that classifying this property as R1-A seems odd because it is very far from a typical R1-A lot, and requiring this lot to comply with the setback and hardcover requirements is almost meaningless. He stated that a variance is somewhat expected because unless you build on the exact footprint of what is there, a variance will be required. He stated that the question for the Commission is whether adding a second story on this lot is reasonable or not. Commissioner Gault stated that two of the neighboring houses are two-story homes. Ms. O’Donnell stated that the homes he is referring to do not have full two-stories and thinks the proposed full two-story house is not the same. Commissioner Eggenberger stated that he feels granting the variance would be in keeping with the neighborhood and does not see any reason to deny it. Commissioner Riedel stated that the applicants have made an effort to keep the hardcover down and keep the foot print close to the original. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING August 6, 2019 Page 6 of 6 Eggenberger moved, Riedel seconded to recommend approval of the proposed variances for property located at 27120 Edgewood Road, subject to the conditions included in the staff report, in addition to the proposed grading on the submitted survey and complete additional analysis of the culvert and drainage areas. Motion carried 4/0. B. LIAISON SCHEDULE Chair Maddy stated that Commissioner Gorham sent an e-mail that he would be unable to cover the Council meeting in August but could take December. The updated liaison schedule is as follows: August – Commissioner Eggenberger September – Commissioner Gault October – Commissioner Riedel November – Chair Maddy December – Commissioner Gorham 5. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR 6. REPORTS • Liaison to Council Council Liaison Siakel reported on matters considered and actions taken during Council’s July 22, 2019, meeting (as detailed in the minutes for that meeting). She noted that they had a lengthy work session to discuss engineering services for the City. • Draft Next Meeting Agenda Planning Director Darling stated there is a variance application slated for the next meeting. Commissioner Riedel asked about the abstention policy because that application is being submitted by a neighbor and friend of his. Planning Director Darling explained that he would need to abstain if he or a family member would be financially impacted from the discussion or the decision. She stated that in this case, he could abstain if he was concerned about a perceived conflict of interest, but he is not required to abstain. She stated that it would be his choice if he wanted to leave the table and sit in the audience for the discussion. Commissioner Riedel asked if it was reasonable for him to abstain from both the overall discussion and the vote in this situation. Planning Director Darling stated that it is reasonable in this situation. 7. ADJOURNMENT Riedel moved, Gault seconded, adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of August 6, 2019, at 8:12 P.M. Motion passed 4/0.