Loading...
01 05 2021 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL CHAMBERS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD TUESDAY, JANUARY 5, 2021 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chair Maddy called the meeting to order at 7:06 P.M. 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. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Maddy; Commissioners Eggenberger, Gorham, and Riedel; Planning Director Darling; and Planning Technician Notermann Absent: Commissioner Gault 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Riedel moved, Gorham seconded, approving the agenda for January 5, 2021, as presented. Roll Call Vote: Ayes – all. Motion passed 4/0. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES  December 1, 2020 Riedel moved, Gorham seconded, approving the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of December 1, 2020, as presented. Roll Call Vote: Ayes – all. Motion passed 4/0. 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR - NONE 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS - Chair Maddy explained the procedure for public hearings. A. PUBLIC HEARING – CUP for Verizon Wireless Antennas on the West Water Tower Applicant: Verizon Wireless Location: 26352 Smithtown road Planning Director Darling gave an overview of the request by Verizon Wireless for a CUP to co- locate six telecommunication antennas on top of the west water tower at the Minnewashta Elementary School site. Staff finds the application consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as well as present and future land uses and recommends approval subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. She noted that the City received one e-mail in support of this application. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 5, 2020 Page 2 of 10 Commissioner Riedel asked about the revenue this could generate and asked if this was part of a competitive negotiation process. Planning Director Darling stated that there is a fixed lease rate. Chair Maddy asked if a Building Permit would be needed in order to attach something to the side of a water tower. Planning Director Darling explained that applicants submit all the structure review for the equipment that would be installed on the water tower through the structural consultants so that part does not require a Building Permit. She stated that sometimes there are things on the site such as a concrete pad or other equipment that would need to be installed per building code requirements which would require a permit. She stated that she is keeping that language in here just in case there may be one that would apply. Commissioner Riedel asked whether there was requirement consent from the other utility providers that they will not interfere with each other’s equipment. He asked if the City had ever been caught in the middle of disputes. Planning Director Darling stated that the City does not get caught in the middle because the providers work with each other on tens of thousands of antenna sites throughout the country and explained that the FCC oversees complaints for the various communications providers. Rob Viera, Buell Consulting, explained that Verizon Wireless was simply wishing to add capacity for bandwidth. He noted that there will not be an additional structure on the property because they are working on an agreement with AT&T to place equipment inside of their existing structure. He stated that they are fine with the conditions recommended by staff and if approved by the City, they expect to start construction in either the spring or summer of 2021. Chair Maddy opened the Public Hearing at 7:21 P.M. noting the procedures used in a Public Hearing. There being no public comment, Chair Maddy closed the public hearing at 7:22 P.M. Gorham moved, Eggenberger seconded, recommending approval of the CUP request by Verizon Wireless antennas on the West Water Tower located at 26352 Smithtown Road, subject to the conditions outlined in the staff report. Roll Call Vote: Ayes – all. Motion passed 4/0. 5. NEW BUSINESS A. Variance for Setback to Property Line for a Firepit/Patio Applicant: Roger and Roberta Aronson Location: 5730 Club Lane Planning Technician Notermann explained that the applicants have requested a variance in order to install a patio with a firepit in their backyard 24 feet from the side property line that abuts a public street. She noted that the City code requires 35 feet in this situation. She explained that this request is an after the fact request because the patio was installed earlier this fall. Staff recommends denial of the request because this is a self-created situation and not a unique situation. Commissioner Riedel asked about the alternatives because it appears as though the patio itself is the problem and not just the firepit. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 5, 2020 Page 3 of 10 Planning Technician Notermann stated that she had spoken with the applicant today. She noted that the applicant had asked if they could just remove a certain number of pavers from the patio to make it 35 feet back and suggested that the Commission asked the applicant about their ideas for alternatives. Commissioner Riedel asked if it was simply the pavers or are there other masonry aspects or benches that are built in. He stated that he would like to get a sense for what level of investment was made by the applicants. Commissioner Eggenberger asked why the variance request was after the fact. Planning Technician Notermann stated that her understanding is that the contractor did not know that the patio needed to adhere to the setbacks and considered it landscaping that did not need to adhere to any of the setback rules. Chair Maddy asked how many pavers are needed to make it a patio because it is not illegal to put a paver at the side of your yard, but it is to have a patio. He asked where the City drew the line in that instance. Planning Director Darling stated that once there are a joined group of pavers and lawn furniture is put on it or other such improvements, that constitutes a patio. Commissioner Gorham asked if the alternatives were also required to be 25 feet from the house. Planning Technician Notermann stated that if it was a portable fire pit and portable lawn chairs, they would not be required to meet a setback. Roberta Aronson stated that in the construction of their home, their contractor was not the one who did the patio and the firepit. She stated that they used Collins Construction for that work. She stated that they were a reputable company that had good reviews. She stated that when they asked if permits would be required, they were told they were not needed because it was landscaping and they believed him. She stated that they were not trying to sneak anything by the City. She asked what the setback requirements would be for the backyard for a firepit or patio. Planning Director Darling stated that the setback for a patio is 40 feet, except you are allowed to project an extra four and a half feet into the setback, so it is essentially 35.5 feet. Ms. Aronson stated that they do meet the backyard setback requirement but there are a few other things she would like the Commission to take into consideration. She noted that their backyard neighbor’s home is 100 feet from the location where their firepit is currently placed. She stated that there are people building along the south property line and with the location of the rain garden, it would have been closer to their property which was another reason for the selection of its current placement. She noted that there are no storm sewers along Club Lane and so they had to put in the rain garden. She stated that the foundation is about 1,300 square feet which is not an especially large footprint. She explained that the current location of the firepit does not interfere with the raingarden that is accepting off-shed water flow. She stated that they do have a landscape plan with the four-foot fence that is being placed 20 feet from Smithtown Road and is an additional 20 feet from the firepit, which is a total of 40 feet in from the curb of Smithtown Road. She stated that they have put in five arbor vitae this fall to shield the view for the public and are planning to put in 15-20 additional arbor vitae along the north side of the property line to add additional shielding from the firepit. She stated that their intent was to impose a minimal effect on CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 5, 2020 Page 4 of 10 the community. She stated that the there are no permanent chairs or other structures such as a barbeque and this is simply an in-ground firepit and a 13-foot diameter section of pavers that are flush to the ground. Commissioner Riedel asked if the center fire ring was poured concrete. Ms. Aronson explained that it was a metal fire ring that is dug into the ground and noted that the pavers have a special product to secure them so they don’t slip around. Commissioner Eggenberger asked how many pavers were in place. Ms. Aronson stated that she does not know other than it is 13 feet across minus the 3 feet of the firepit ring. Roger Aronson stated that their north property line is unique in that it doesn’t abut another residence and asked if that was taken into consideration when they look at the setbacks should be. Planning Director Darling noted that setbacks are all measured from the property lines. Chair Maddy asked how many non-conforming structures there are along that stretch of Smithtown Road. Planning Director Darling stated that on the south side, there are at least two homes that are non- conforming. Chair Maddy wondered if it may make sense to average it out similar to what they do for front setbacks on houses. Commissioner Eggenberger commended the Aronson’s for coming forward even though it was after the fact. He asked what the difficulty would be in moving the firepit over in order to make it conforming. Ms. Aronson stated that they brought this up to their contractor and did not get very far with them, so they would have to pay to have to redone by another contractor. Commissioner Riedel stated that within the confines of the lot, including the setbacks, he believes that there is a place to locate the patio and meet all the requirements. Ms. Aronson suggested that the Commission take a look at the grading on the lot. Chair Maddy noted that although this was not a public hearing, he wanted to give an opportunity for public input at 7:46 P.M. There was no public testimony. Commissioner Riedel stated that this is a difficult situation because although it seems reasonable, it is non-conforming, it is newly constructed, and there is nothing that suggests a variance is appropriate. He stated that he would advise the applicant to hold the contractor liable. Commissioner Gorham stated that he is torn on this request also and noted that he had built a similar patio in 2017 and does not like the idea of moving it. He stated that the infiltration area exists because of the problem this area and the whole City is having with water infiltration. He CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 5, 2020 Page 5 of 10 stated that he would have a hard time approving this even though he feels terrible about what happened with their contractor. Commissioner Riedel stated that he had the same experience with a contractor telling him that no permit was required for things where permits were clearly required and stated that he is fully sympathetic with the Aronson’s situation. Chair Maddy stated that in looking at the elevation marks on the survey, there is more angle than you would think. He noted that he believes there would be about a foot difference in elevation from one side of the patio to the other if it was moved. Planning Director Darling noted that the Commission could use that information as a practical difficulty and include it in their findings. Ms. Aronson stated that the elevation levels definitely pose a bit of a problem. Commissioner Gorham stated that if an infiltration area is not a practical difficulty then he does not think the grading would be either. Commissioner Riedel stated that he does not think the Commission would have recommended a variance before the fact, but recognizes that there are real dollars involved in this situation. Commissioner Eggenberger stated that he agreed with Commissioner Riedel. Riedel moved, Eggenberger seconded, recommending denial of the Variance Request for Setback to Property Line for a Firepit/Patio by Roger and Roberta Aronson at 5730 Club Lane. Commissioner Riedel noted that this request will still go before the Council and it is simply the Planning Commission’s job to explain the letter of the law but they will have the chance to make their case to the Council. Roll Call Vote: Ayes – all. Motion passed 4/0. B. Variance to OHWL Setback of Lake Minnetonka Applicant: Christian Dean Architecture Location: 454 Lafayette Avenue Planning Director Darling stated that this application is a request for a variance to the Ordinary High-Water Level (OHWL) setback of Lake Minnetonka. The applicant is proposing to put an addition onto the home and would like to add a second story and put a at-grade patio on the north side. They are requesting a variance to allow an encroachment on the southwest corner of the home as well as a patio on the north side of the home. The City received one letter regarding this application that addressed concerns with the impact of the changes to the Shorewood Yacht Club than on this variance. Staff recommends approval subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. Commissioner Eggenberger suggested that the wording should be changed in the conditions from “submit” information on the permeable driveway materials, to something that clearly outlines that the city has to approve of the permeable materials. Commissioner Gorham asked for further clarification on the practical difficulties. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 5, 2020 Page 6 of 10 Planning Director Darling stated the existing home was built in 1955 and the Shoreland regulations were approved in about 1987, so the home does not currently conform to the 50-foot setback requirement. The addition on the east side of the home meets the requirements and noted that they are taking off a sloped roof and putting on a flat roof to have a rooftop deck. She explained that because it is not enclosed, she does not see anything that would increase the non- conformity. She noted that the only issue with the second-floor living area is the connection from one side of the building to the other which would be a new encroachment. Christian Dean, architect for the property owners, explained the reasoning behind their design approach. He stated that the extension of the roof deck over the southwest corner of the home is just a means of connecting the second-floor living space to the western most roof deck. He stated that it is a flat roof overhang. He stated that the north terrace is 3.5 feet further toward the OHWL than the adjacent house and is proposed to be of stone materials. He stated that it is about 2.5 feet above existing grade and noted that he can consult with the property owners about meeting Planning Director Darling’s request to align with the adjacent house and bring it back a few feet. He stated that they are proposing to replace a portion of the driveway and use a permeable paver product. He gave an overview of the other plans to reduce the paved areas. Commissioner Riedel stated that the code allows eaves to project 2 feet into the setback. He stated that this home is already non-conforming but the plans are for it to project 5 feet. Mr. Dean stated that essentially, they are trying to align the roof deck so there is access to the second-floor bedroom spaces and to have access to get to the western portion of the home. He stated that they recognize that it is non-conforming, but their thought process was that it was not disturbing the land or a full structure and is just a roof guard rail and deck. Commissioner Riedel stated that he agrees with that and noted that it seems reasonable. He stated that this is a very creative way to “mostly” meet code by building on the areas that are conforming. Commissioner Gorham stated that the plans seem pretty minimally invasive. Patrick Foss, 456 Lafayette Avenue, Excelsior, stated that he feels this design is brilliant and the property owners also reached out to the neighbors and explained everything they intended to do. He stated that his property also requires a variance for anything they want to do. He stated that he supported their plans as submitted and feels the overhang does not interrupt anyone’s site lines. He stated that he has spoken with some of the other neighbors and they also support it as has been submitted. Chair Maddy opened this item up for public testimony at 8:18 p.m. Ralph “Inky” Campbell, 450 Lafayette Avenue, stated that he has lived here for twelve years. He stated that he agrees with Mr. Foss that this is a very creative design that will do nothing but improve the neighborhood. He stated that the one concern he has is the new roadway and asked if there was a way to avoid putting the final coat on it until the construction work for this home is completed. He reiterated that the neighbors in the area all think this is a wonderful design and hope the Commission will support it. Ben Steadman, stated that he did not want his letter to be interpreted as not supporting this variance. He stated that this variance will not impact him in any way and he is for it and thinks the design will help save the house and make it look beautiful. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 5, 2020 Page 7 of 10 There being no additional public testimony, Chair Maddy closed the public testimony at 8:23 p.m. Commissioner Gorham asked about Planning Director Darling’s recommendation regarding the patio. Planning Director Darling stated that her recommendation is that at no point should the patio be closer than 44.7 feet which is the setback for the home next door. Commissioner Gorham stated that he thinks this is a really smart design but feels the Commission cannot be swayed by a great design for reasons outside of the variance criteria. He stated that he does feel there are some practical difficulties here and the applicants appear to be doing the minimum to alleviate that and are being really concise with their design decisions nor is anything they are doing extravagant. He stated that he does agree with the recommendation to reduce the patio size. Commissioner Riedel stated that he fully agrees and feels there are considerable practical difficulties. He stated that he appreciates the way the architect designed this and feels it seems reasonable and well thought out. He stated that he agrees with the recommendation to reduce the size of the patio. Chair Maddy asked if it makes more sense to say that the width is limited rather than trying to have them match the curvature of the OHWL. Commissioner Gorham stated that he does not think anyone is suggesting that option. Chair Maddy stated that is the way the recommendation was written. Commissioner Riedel suggested changing the language to be that the closest point would be no closer than 44.7 feet. Mr. Foss stated that if the City is using the home to the right of this property as a reference point, these are unique properties and would suggest that the Commission come out and look at the property. He stated that he understands the variance process, but losing all of the deck space does not make sense just to bring it into conformance. He reiterated that he supports this proposal, as designed. Mr. Dean asked if they could orthogonally align with the adjacent home and strike the line straight across the entire terrace so they do not have to impose a harsher setback on the western side of the terrace. He stated that he thinks the property owners would be okay with an 11-foot-deep terrace, but contouring it seems challenging. Mr. Campbell stated that he is inclined to support Mr. Foss’s statement, but acknowledging the architect’s offer. He stated that he agrees that if the Commission were to see the adjacent home and how they are all situated on the point, he thinks they would agree that they want the deck to be substantial. Commissioner Riedel stated that he agrees with Mr. Dean even though it means approval of increasing the non-conformity in this situation. He stated that this approach seems reasonable and noted that this is a very challenging site. Commissioner Eggenberger stated that he would also agree. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 5, 2020 Page 8 of 10 Chair Maddy stated that it sounds like there is a great desire by the Commission to have a rectangular patio and asked if the Commission wanted to set a specific number of leave it up to the Council. Commissioner Riedel stated that he was swayed by the architect’s suggestion of 11 feet with the same width from east to west. Riedel moved, Gorham seconded, recommending approval of the Variance Request for OHWL Setback of Lake Minnetonka by Christian Dean, for property located at 454 Lafayette Avenue, subject to the patio being aligned with the existing house to the east and protrude 11 feet from the house with the same width from east to west, and conditions as outlined in the staff report. Roll Call Vote: Ayes – all. Motion passed 4/0. C. Variance to OHWL Setback of Lake Minnetonka Applicant: Lecy Brothers Location: 4320 Dellwood Lane Planning Director Darling gave an overview of the request for a variance to OWHL setback at 4320 Dellwood Lane on Enchanted Island. She stated that this a request to swap out several of the steps and stoops and replace them with newer, nearly at grade steps. She stated that the problem is that the entire home is non-conforming to the OHWL and is another home that was constructed prior to the adoption of the Shoreland regulations. She stated that the home was built around 1987 and noted that there have been improvements made to the property since that time that have increased the impervious surface to 32.38%. She stated that staff is recommending that the two non-conforming patios be removed to reduce the impervious surface. She noted that staff does recommend approval of the variance request itself. Commissioner Riedel asked what type of material the existing patios are made out of or if they were merely pavers in the ground. Andy Johnan, Lecy Brothers, stated that the new patios will be built with a footing and a concrete stoop. He stated that the prior improvements were done prior to the current owners purchasing the property. He noted that the main patio has a fire pit that is built up and is not just pavers. He gave an overview of the existing stoop situation and explained that they have been removed because they were all sinking and did not have proper footings. He stated that they are reducing the size of the stoops in elevation as well as towards the lake. He explained that they are proposing to remove 609 square feet and add 375 square feet, which is a net reduction of 234 square feet. He stated that there is a stone walkway, a raised garden area and a stone monument that is on the lake that will be removed. He stated that he understands the staff recommendation regarding removing the patios that are non-conforming, but reiterated that those are the primary patios for the property. Commissioner Eggenberger asked when the two non-conforming patios were put in. Planning Director Darling stated that by looking at older aerial photos, it appears as though they were not there in 1996 nor were they shown on the surveys from when the gazebo was added, but were there in 2000. Tim Ehlen, 4320 Dellwood Lane, stated that he feels the efforts they have made to reduce the non-conforming land cover have been remarkable. He stated that if those patios are removed, they will have no outdoor space to use. He explained that one of the reasons they fell in love with CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 5, 2020 Page 9 of 10 this property was the patios that are now in question and noted that they are not visible from the lake. He stated that this is a very unique property and losing those outdoor gathering areas would be traumatic. Chair Maddy opened this item for public testimony at 8:56 p.m. There being no testimony, he closed that portion of the meeting. Commissioner Riedel stated that this is tough because he can see the argument that was made by the homeowner that the firepit area is a huge part of the value of the property. He stated that he feels this would be punishing the home owners for a code violation committed by the previous owners. He stated that he agrees with granting the variance for all aspects of the stoops, but questions the remainder and struggles with whether the sins of the past should be forgiven or not. Commissioner Gorham stated that he completely agrees. He asked if the plans to reduce the impervious surface areas were in response to staff comments or if it was done on their own. Planning Director Darling stated that staff had told the applicant that if they were increasing, they would have to reduce somewhere else on the property. Chair Maddy noted that they applicant decided to go a bit above and beyond in the reduction. Commissioner Riedel stated that the homeowners bought this property fully expecting that they could enjoy what was already on the property and cannot be attributed to be their fault. He stated that he does not want to send the message to homeowners that they shouldn’t apply for permits if they have non-conforming portions of their property because the City may force them to do something. He stated that he would much rather have people apply for permits than not. Commissioner Gorham stated that his thought is that this is not about the patios it is about the stairs and he is inclined to approve the variance. He stated that he feels they have done enough in other areas with the removal of other areas to reduce the hard cover. Chair Maddy stated that the question is whether the Commission wants to punish them for something a previous owner did to the property. Commissioner Eggenberger stated that if this was the owner that put in the patios, he would say that they need to be removed, but because this is a new owner, he plans to recommend approval. Gorham moved, Eggenberger seconded, recommending approval of the variance request to the OHWL Setback of Lake Minnetonka by Lecy Brothers for property located at 4320 Dellwood Lane, with the conditions as listed in the staff report, without the need to remove the two non-conforming patio spaces. Roll Call Vote: Ayes – all. Motion passed 4/0. 6. OTHER BUSINESS Commissioner Gorham noted that he has not been getting any of the e-mails that staff has referred to being sent out. Commissioner Riedel stated that he also has not. Chair Maddy stated that he has also not received the e-mails. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 5, 2020 Page 10 of 10 Commissioner Eggenberger noted that the e-mail system was updated and the Commission needed to go in and do some housekeeping. Planning Director Darling stated that the Commission needs to log in and set it up to reforward the e-mails. She stated that she will re-send the instructions for updating this information. 7. REPORTS • Council Meeting Report Planning Director Darling gave an overview of the December 14, 2020 Council meeting (as detailed in the minutes for that meeting). • Draft Next Meeting Agenda Director Darling stated there is a PUD development stage plan for the Villas at Shorewood Village and the draft Comprehensive Plan slated for the next Planning Commission meeting. She noted that there is also a joint meeting with the Park Commission next week to continue the fire lane discussion. 8. ADJOURNMENT Riedel moved, Gorham seconded, adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of January 5, 2021, at 9:20 P.M. Roll Call Vote: Ayes – all Motion passed 4/0.