Loading...
Planning Commission Meeting Memo - April 1, 2025 and MinutesC;; f9horewood Planning Commission Meeting Item Title/Subject: Rezoning Three Parcels to R-3A Item Meeting Date: April 1, 2025 48 Prepared by: Jake Griffiths, Planning Director Attachments: Location Map LOCATION: 24560, 24590, and 24620 Smithtown Rd APPLICANT: City of Shorewood BACKGROUND The Comprehensive Plan is a "road map" for the community. It establishes the vision and goals for the future and follows three basic questions: what is the state of the community today, what should the community be in the future, and how will the community get there. The Comprehensive Plan provides the foundation for all land use and zoning regulation in the City, and all decisions made by the City must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan pursuant to Minnesota State Statute § 462.357, Subd. 2. (c). As part of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, the City reguided three parcels to the Medium Density residential land use classification of 6-8 units per acre. This change was adopted in order to meet minimum net density and affordable housing requirements imposed on the City by the State of Minnesota through the Metropolitan Council. REQUEST Recently, the City adopted zoning ordinance amendments that amended the R-3A zoning district to allow development that would be consistent with the medium density land use classification. Tonight's request is the final step of implementing the 2040 Comprehensive Plan's medium density direction by applying the newly amended R-3A zoning district to the three properties located at 24560 Smithtown Rd, 24590 Smithtown Rd and 24620 Smithtown Rd. This request is not tied to any specific development proposal and is largely a housekeeping item that is being brought forward in order to maintain consistency between the Comprehensive Plan and zoning regulations as required by State Statute. Notice of the request was mailed to all property owners within 750 feet by postcard and a sign was posted on the affected properties. Notice of the public hearing was also published in the City's official newspaper and mailed to all property owners within 750 feet of the subject properties at least 10 days prior to the public hearing, was posted on the City's website and at City Hall. As of the publication of this report no public comments have been received regarding this request. ANALYSIS The City is proposing to rezone the properties to R-3A. Requests for zoning map amendments are reviewed according to the following standards: 0 The proposed action is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Page 2 The Comprehensive Plan guides the three properties as Medium Density Residential. The R-3A zoning district was recently amended specifically to implement the guidance of the Comprehensive Plan. The application of the zoning district is appropriate and is necessary in order to ensure consistency between the Comprehensive Plan and the City's zoning regulations. • The proposed use is compatible with present and future land uses in the area. The existing uses on each of the subject properties may continue as a legal nonconforming use indefinitely. However, if it redevelops to another use, it must be redeveloped with medium density housing consistent with the R-3A zoning district. The properties are located near the intersection of Smithtown Rd and County Rd 19 and will provide a transition between the existing commercial properties to the east, and the low -density residential neighborhoods to the west. • The proposed use would not tend to depreciate the area and would promote and enhance the general public welfare and not be detrimental to or endanger public health or safety. Property values in Shorewood are highly resilient to the impact from zoning district changes and new development. It is not likely that redevelopment of any of the properties would depreciate the area as long as the development is consistent with the requirements of the City Code. • The proposed uses can be accommodated with existing public services and would not overburden the City's service capacity. All three parcels have the ability to be connected to the municipal water and sewer systems, and existing local infrastructure is adequately sized to provide utilities to the properties. The adjacent road networks are adequately designed to accommodate any traffic generated by medium density residential uses. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the rezoning request in order to meet the requirements of Minnesota State Statute § 462.357, Subd. 2. (c) and align the zoning classification of the three properties with the policy of the Comprehensive Plan. Location Map `North F O smitMown-µd s U T C J V O P 7 U CAN D G .3""Wess Wry E41, TJl1J5 Hnnneni.. fn..Mu DRAFT CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING APRIL 1, 2025 Page 4 of 17 Chair Huskins noted that he was not aware that there was not an existing garage structure Mr. Wallace explained that, in the past, there was a single -stall garage on a separate portion of the property, but the driveway did not go to it, so he was not sure of the overall history of the structure. He stated that the current plans call for the driveway to be located at the end of the existing gravel driveway. Commissioner Eggenberger moved, Commissioner Holker seconded, recommending approval of a Variance to Construct a Detached Garage Structure for applicant, Dan Wallace at 5765 Eureka Road, subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. Motion passed 410. -96 all -IwLd:I wkrci;ZEKdi7TkitPif] B. PUBLIC HEARING — REZONING THREE PARCELS TO R-3A Applicant: City -initiated Request Location: 24560, 24590, and 24620 Smithtown Road Planning Director Griffiths explained that this item was essentially a bit of housekeeping with the City's Zoning Code and to carry out the intent of several years of planning decisions that had been made by the City related to the Medium Density Zoning District. He reviewed details within the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and the requirement for rezoning certain properties to meet the minimum net density and affordable housing requirements that have been imposed on the City by the Met Council. He noted that the text amendments to the Medium Density Zoning District section of the City Code were approved last month, and now they were moving forward with changing the zoning of the properties to be what the City had said it would be. He explained that two of the three properties in this application were vacant, and the other was a single-family home, but explained that even if the property was rezoned it would not really change anything for the property owner in the short term. He clarified that they can continue to live on this property as long as they would like and there would be no push by the City to have this developed. He reviewed the criteria used in evaluating this rezoning and explained that staff recommended approval to align the zoning classification of these properties with the policy within the Comprehensive Plan. He noted that the City had received one comment on this request prior to tonight's meeting and read aloud the comment received from Brian Megan, 5670 Christopher Road. Chair Huskins asked if Planning Director Griffiths had stated that the two properties to the east were currently zoned Commercial, and thought that the middle property was the one that had the single-family home on it. Planning Director Griffiths stated that the single-family home was on the middle property. Chair Huskins asked for some background on how a single-family home was located on a parcel guided for commercial use. Planning Director Griffiths displayed the zoning map and explained that he had misspoken and explained that the property located the farthest east was zoned Commercial and pointed out the location of the single-family and EDA-owned lots. DRAFT CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING APRIL 1, 2025 Page 5 of 17 Chair Huskins stated that he believed the EDA-owned property had a number of applications that the City Council had denied for multi -family projects, as well as one related to pickleball courts. Commissioner Holker stated that she recollected that the Commission had recommended approval of a limited townhome project that came through after the pickleball court application. Planning Director Griffiths stated that last fall, the Planning Commission had recommended approval of a medium -density, detached townhome style development for that site, but noted that this rezoning was not tied to that in any way. He explained that the City simply had to go through with rezoning the properties, regardless of what applications were submitted. He noted that staff had received the next step information for the project just referenced and should come back before the Commission at an upcoming meeting. Commissioner Magistad noted that these were long, narrow parcels and asked if there was any expectation that any high -density housing developments would be coordinated across the parcels. Planning Director Griffiths stated that this would be zoned medium density, which was six to eight units per acre. He noted that coordinating something across all three parcels would be up to the developer, but noted that the property farthest east was already working on its own. Commissioner Magistad asked if the single-family home property could indefinitely exchange hands and be rebuilt as a single-family home. Planning Director Griffiths confirmed that the single-family home could be sold as many times as they liked but with the tearing down and rebuilding portion of the question, there would be some restrictions with those actions but clarified that if they kept the same footprint, essentially, they could continue to do as they like with a single-family home. Commissioner Holker stated that the last time this was discussed, she believed the former Planning Director Darling had said something about the fact that for the City -owned lot, the City would most likely not do anything with that lot until the single-family home went away. Planning Director Griffiths stated that he would agree that there was no plan for that parcel, nor had one been discussed. Commissioner Eggenberger stated that Planning Director Griffiths had stated that there would really be no downside for the person who owned the single-family lot because they can live in it, sell it, or have a medium -density housing project on it. He asked if a possible downside would be that the people buying the home would not want higher density on either side of them. Planning Director Griffiths agreed that, in theory, that could be a downside from an aesthetic perspective for the homeowner, but noted that the criteria used from a zoning change perspective was property values and these types of changes do not have a substantial negative impact on those values and in some cases they can actually increase property values. Commissioner Magistad asked if the City Council would have the opportunity to receive additional public comment if people submitted statements before the City Council meeting. DRAFT CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING APRIL 1, 2025 Page 6 of 17 Planning Director Griffiths stated that for any application that the City received, if they get written comments between the Planning Commission and the City Council meetings, they forward those to the Council. Chair Huskins opened the Public Hearing at 7:44 P.M., noting the procedures used in a Public Hearing. There being no comments, he closed the Public Hearing at 7:44 P.M. Commissioner Holker moved, Commissioner Magistad seconded, recommending approval of Rezoning Three Parcels to R-3A for the City -initiated Request for properties located at: 24560, 24590, and 24620 Smithtown Road. Motion passed 4/0. C. PUBLIC HEARING — REZONING THREE PARCELS TO R-2A Applicant: City -initiated Request Location: 6055, 6065, and 6067 Lake Linden Drive Planning Director Griffiths explained that this item was very similar to the previous item on tonight's agenda, but had less to do with the Comprehensive Plan and more to do with the changes that were just made to the Medium Density Zoning District. He noted that these parcels were currently zoned R-3A and, with the changes that were just made to that zoning district, that designation no longer made sense for these properties. He explained that this item was essentially a bit of housekeeping within the City's zoning code. He gave a brief overview of the thought process behind staffs recommendation to guide these parcels to become R-2A rather than R-3A. He noted that the City received one public comment before the meeting and read aloud the statement submitted by Kevin Burns, 6070 Lake Linden Drive, in opposition to the zoning change. Commissioner Holker asked for a quick overview of the differences between R-3A and R-2A. Planning Director Griffiths noted that it was a bit nuanced, but gave a brief overview of some of the differences between the R-3A and R-2A zoning districts. Commissioner Holker stated that this change would not impact the property owners and asked if Planning Director Griffiths believed that this zoning change would impact them in a positive way. Planning Director Griffiths stated that, in his opinion, if the City did not approve the rezoning, there would be negative impacts to these property owners because that would mean that anything on their property that did not meet the new zoning district the Commission just recommended would not be considered a non -conformity that even though would be grandfathered in, could present a problem further down the road, for example, if they wanted to go build a shed. He stated that this rezoning would allow the property owners to have the same flexibility they currently have without subjecting them to the need for variances when they want to make improvements to their property. Commissioner Magistad asked what could be the drawback to making this housekeeping change. Planning Director Griffiths stated that he did not have a good answer to that question. He stated that from staffs perspective, the Comprehensive Plan and the City Code all point towards this action being the best solution for the homeowners. He stated that the only real potential impact is that the setback now was 30 feet and with this change would be 35 feet, but explained that in that situation, the City would work with the property owner and they could keep what is there.