Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout05-14-2013CITY OF MEDINA PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes Tuesday, May 14, 2013 1. Call to Order: Commissioner Charles Nolan called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Planning Commissioners Robin Reid, Randy Foote, Charles Nolan and Mark Osmanski Absent: V. Reid and Kent Williams Also Present: City Councilmember Kathleen Martin, City Planner Dusty Finke, Nate Sparks of NAC and Planning Assistant Debra Peterson. 2. Public Comments on items not on the agenda No public comments. 3. Update from City Council proceedings Martin updated the Commission on recent activities and decisions by the City Council. 4. Planning Department Report Finke provided an update of upcoming Planning projects. 5. Approval of the April 9, 2013 Draft Planning Commission meeting minutes. Motion by Foote, seconded by R. Reid, to approve the April 9, 2013 with one minor change. Motion carried unanimously. (Absent: V. Reid and Kent Williams) 6. Public Hearing — Randy Cole & Sandra Fenske - 2959 Lakeshore Avenue - Request for a Variance to the Setback Requirements from the Ordinary High Water Line (OHWL) of Lake Independence for an addition and deck onto their home (PID 18-118-23-23-0022). Sparks presented request for a Variance to the OHWL setback requirements. He explained the lot is approximately 7500 square feet in size. The applicant is proposing a full addition with a narrow deck and stairs. The stairs extend out into the yard currently and would be proposed to be less intrusive and would be parallel to the deck and not towards the lake. In 1999 variances were granted to build a home on the property to replace a cabin. The house was then built 25 feet from the road rather than the 30 foot requirement, even though they weren't approved for the 25 foot setback. Staff is not sure how this happened, though the front of the house appears to be in line with the other homes along the lake. He said some consideration at the time of construction may have been allowed, but staff is unsure. The lot currently exceeds the allowable hard cover. Sparks further summarized the neighboring properties and Variances granted along the lakeshore. 1 Sparks reviewed the Variance Criteria with the Commission and explained if the Variance was granted as requested, it wouldn't change the character of the area. He said lately the City has been looking closer at the impact of the local waters. He said in this case, if the Commission were to consider approving the Variance staff would recommend the applicant improve the stormwater runoff. Improvements would be to replace existing hardcover in areas where plastic is used around landscaping and replace it with permeable products. Sparks said the Watershed would also like to see reduced hardcover on the lot which would assist in less runoff to the lake. Sparks said by granting a Variance for this property it wouldn't be creating precedence for others. He further suggested stormwater management be reevaluated. R. Reid asked why the applicant needed a variance when they are reducing the setback distance from original variance approved. Sparks explained that the original Variance was approved for the deck and not for a full addition. Finke said the request increases what was originally approved by increased massing of the addition going up three stories and an additional deck. Osmanski asked where the stormwater was located. Finke and Sparks explained its location and that the catch basin would be to catch their own drainage. Nolan asked what ideas would be helpful on a residential scale. Sparks said staff would have the City Engineer look at it to determine what would be best. He said perhaps a small raingarden to slow the water from getting to the lake. He said it would need to be large enough to serve the purpose. Foote asked if any of the other land owners had anything similar and Sparks said he couldn't tell from the applicant's location. Nolan asked if the construction of the home not meeting the setback was by the current owner. Sparks said no, it was a different land owner. Public Hearing opened at 7:00 p.m. Applicant Sandra Fenske of 2959 Lakeshore Avenue explained that the City had made improvements to some of the runoff issues in the area and sees huge improvements from Balsam. She said she'd be willing to take the plastic out from the landscaping areas. Nolan asked the size of the house and she said it was a four bedroom. Nolan asked what prompted the dimensions for the addition and Fenske said it was determined by the current size of the deck. Dave Raskob, the applicant's builder, explained that he's a neighbor and builder and wanted to work with the existing conditions and make the same size with no additional impact to the lake. Nolan asked what was currently on the ground elevation under the deck. Raskob said it currently has a concrete slab which is cracked and would be taken out and replaced to improve it. Foote asked if the applicant gets water from the neighboring properties. Fenske said they used to get water from the lot to the north but they made improvements with a swale and don't have issues any longer. 2 Public Hearing closed at 7:37 p.m. Osmanski, Foote, and R. Reid said they would approve the variance if the applicant reduced the impervious surface. Nolan said he didn't see exchanging the plastic for the fabric as an equal exchange. He asked for the applicant to look at some of the hard surface areas and to reduce it further. He suggested trading a built surface for landscaping or forgoing the grilling deck or the deck out by the lake. Nolan commented that the applicant is adding to the footprint. Osmanski suggested a specific percentage of reduction be recommended as an option. Nolan said at a minimum he would want to see the drainage system improved. He said it's common for properties to be able to mow right up to the lake, but then there isn't anything to stop the chemicals from going into the lake. Foote said they were all good points and if they lowered the size of the addition that would be acceptable. Nolan said they wouldn't have to lessen the addition size, but rather eliminate the grilling deck, sundeck, fire pit or something. R. Reid asked if Nolan's issue was the additional 86 square feet being added for the deck. Nolan said it was the increased hard cover on a lot that currently doesn't meet the minimum and are asking for something additional. Motion by Foote, seconded by R. Reid to recommend approval of the Variance to the setback requirements from the OHWL on Lake Independence for an addition and deck onto their home, conditioned that the private drainage is improved as recommended by staff and the impervious surface be reduced including but not limited to the areas within the landscaped areas. Ayes by Foote, Osmanski, and R. Reid. Nay by Nolan. Motion carried. (Absent: V. Reid and Kent Williams). 7. Public Hearing - Ordinance Amendment to Chapter 8 of the Medina City Code relating to required street widths. Finke presented the street width regulation changes. Nolan asked what the previous changes were. Finke said the previous ordinance didn't have minimum standards in City Code. He explained that in December a new ordinance was adopted relating to road improvements which required a minimum roadway width. As recommended currently, any subdivision with three lots or more would require a road meeting minimum roadway width requirements. The proposed changes in the draft ordinance modify the number of lots that trigger the road improvement. One lot into two lots would not be required to meet the minimum width requirements. Foote asked as an example, if a property owner came in and wanted to divide their one lot into two lots and it was approved and didn't need to make improvements, but then a neighbor on the same road comes in to divide their one lot into two, would the second party on the roadway have to improve the road? Finke responded by saying the ordinance presumes some sort of improvement, but the two owners on the same road could seek the same flexibility without having to widen the road, but they would not be able to then apply again and further subdivide any portion of the original lot. 3 Nolan asked staff if they were aware of any other municipalities that allow less than 20 feet in width roadways. Finke said not to his knowledge with new streets. He said currently a person on an existing road wouldn't be allowed to subdivide without improving the entire road to 20 feet in width. Nolan asked if a cap should be put on the flexibility of people subdividing on a narrower road. Finke said the ordinance is written to provide the City a lot of flexibility. R. Reid asked at what point is a driveway turned into a road. Finke said over two lots would trigger it. Neil Wolfe, Hamel Fire Department, said 20 feet is for a reason, because they are driving big trucks. Running a 24 foot truck which is 8 % feet wide in 10 below zero temperatures with trees along the road is difficult. He said some driveways are as long as a quarter of a mile in length and he feels the width standards are there for a reason and that it works. He said some of the houses being built are the size of a commercial building (5-10,000 square feet) and their trucks can't get down an 18 foot roadway. The standard fire access road requirements need to remain. R. Reid asked how we separate the difference of a driveway and a road. Wolfe said a lot of existing private roads are as difficult to maneuver through as are driveways. Nolan asked if there was any liability to the City if the roadway width was reduced. Finke said the new ordinance would allow staff to have the ability to discuss requests related to road widths. Wolfe said he doesn't want to deviate from the 20 foot requirements. Finke said the new urban subdivisions will be 28 feet and it's the rural property areas that would have the flexibility. Finke said that Wolfe made a good point concerning rural areas possibly needing more road width than urban areas since urban areas have fire hydrants. Wolfe said it's a difficult task at best to make sure no one gets hurt, but with the long winters it's dangerous with the ice and weight of the trucks. Inherently the tanker trucks are the most dangerous to drive. If a fire is at a home and it has a long driveway it should have appropriate accessibility with a 20 foot wide driveway for safety reasons. He said the Fire Department has 8-12 minutes to mitigate a fire. R. Reid asked how wide a tanker was and Wolfe said Hamel's is 8'8". Finke explained that with snow plowing the guys run into the same problem, though the City has the option to use different vehicles based on the location they are plowing. Wolfe added that it's happened once already where the fire trucks couldn't access the house due to site circumstances and accessibility. Public Hearing opened at 8:20 p.m. Bob Mitchell of 1745 Willow Drive said in his building he had to have a water bladder in each building until the City built a water tower. He said if properties aren't 4 accessible to the Fire Department, insurance companies aren't going to insure the building(s). Public Hearing closed at 8:22 p.m. Foote said he's generally been in favor of wider roads. He said he would like to keep it at 20 feet in width which would then not open up the City to legal issues. Osmanski said he is in favor of safe streets, but to allow flexibility to create adjustments to existing narrower streets for small subdivisions would be nice if it wouldn't put the fire fighters at risk. R. Reid asked if the City had reduced the roadway widths on any subdivisions. Finke said only one he could think of was 20 feet in width. He said the question is if someone comes in would the 18 foot road be sufficient with improvements or would a 24 or 28 foot roadway width be required. Foote said his concern is multiple subdivisions serviced by an 18 foot wide roadway. Nolan asked if they were talking about the road or the driveway. Finke said the road to get to the driveway. Nolan asked Wolfe if the ordinance would allow flexibility and if safety is a factor in design. Wolfe said he maintains the opinion that a 20'width road should be required since trucks will only be getting larger. The ability to allow people to not meet the 20' roadway width would only increase the number of requests the City would see. Wolfe said he still maintains the opinion of requiring 20' roadway width. Foote asked Wolfe how he felt if pullover areas would be created and Wolfe responded by saying it would still be a danger to his fire fighters when they pull over on a class five roadway. Motion by Osmanski, seconded by Foote, to deny the Ordinance Amendment to allow flexibility to reduce street widths less than 20 feet. Motion carries unanimously (Absent: V. Reid and Kent Williams). 8. Continued Public Hearing — Thomas T. Morrison — Lot Subdivision of one existing Lot into Two Lots at 1525 Hunter Drive (PID 25-118-23-22-0005) and a Variance from minimum Road Width requirements. Sparks presented the application. He explained to the Commission that the applicant withdrew his request for a Variance to the road width requirements today, but would still like to subdivide his property. Foote asked how long the road was and Sparks said about a quarter mile. Nolan said he wasn't at the meeting last month and went to the property and didn't think that it would be that difficult to expand. R. Reid commented that there would be quite an expense to widen and make the road improvements. She further asked what the narrowest and widest points of the road were. Sparks explained it ranged between 18 feet and 20 feet. Finke said they've gone out since winter and the road is on average 18 1/2 feet wide. Nolan asked what design specifications the City would require for a 5 private road. The Commission discussed and Finke said it would have to meet City regulations. Truck Morrison, the applicant, said he withdrew his request for a Variance. He said since the previous meeting he had met with the Ferris's lawyer and had worked through concerns they had about the driveway running parallel along their property. Morrison said they agreed to install eight spaded trees to place anywhere the Ferris's so choose. Foote asked if the applicant was willing to build the road to the 20 foot width standard and Morrison said if they had to they would, but are hoping to not have to widen the area closest to Hunter Drive. Ferris of 1535 Hunter Drive said he thought six more homes could be allowed along their roadway and is inevitable. So by definition, the area will become a development over time. He thinks the road width issue will continue over time. Morrison said three of the nine homes have driveways 1/4 mile long and narrow. Nolan said if the driveway isn't safe for a fire truck to drive down, then property owners are losing some of the fire protection. Public Hearing closed at 8:52 p.m. R. Reid asked for clarification concerning there not being a need for a Variance since they were just subdividing one lot into two. Finke said yes and that a condition should be placed on the application to require the road to meet City standards. Finke suggested the applicant and Ferris have a formal agreement with staff reviewing it as it relates to the easement for the driveway. The Commission agreed to include it as a condition. Nolan said he is pleased that two property owners could get together and resolve their differences since he hadn't seen it happen very often. Morrison asked if they could have more than 180 days to file with the County and the Commission said they would be willing to allow. Motion by R. Reid, seconded by Foote, to approve a Lot Subdivision of one existing Lot into Two Lots conditioned on modifying condition number four to require a 20 foot roadway being constructed and to allow for the applicant to have more than 180 days to file the necessary paperwork with Hennepin County to effectuate the lot split. Motion carries unanimously (Absent: V. Reid and Kent Williams). 9. Continued Public Hearing — Ordinance Amendment to Chapter 8 of the Medina City Code related to flag lots, lot frontage, driveway regulations, minimum street grades, and the use of public easements and rights -of -way. Finke presented the ordinance Amendment. 6 Nolan asked at what point does a driveway become a road. Finke said with four homes. Finke said the minimum width standard deals with the reduction of side loaded garages. It also requires new driveways in nonrural districts to be paved which are common in suburban areas. The frontage of a flag lot should have a minimum of 1 % street gradient. Finke said rural lots would be required to have 60 feet of street frontage. Martin asked why 60 feet and Finke said it was chosen to be consistent with the rural right-of-way width requirements. Finke explained that the width would be wide enough to create a road if necessary in the future. Martin asked for clarification of suitable soils within private roads or access easements. Finke explained that suitable soils under private streets within outlots do not count for adjacent property. He noted that the proposed ordinance amendment would treat the area within an access easement the same as if it were in an outlot, and it wouldn't be counted towards the suitable soils for either property. He noted that the reason for this is that locating a septic system within the access easement would be inconsistent with its use for access. However, if the subdivider proposed a flag lot, suitable soils within the flagpole would be counted towards the lot in which they are located. Finke explained utility easements are a big concern. Drainage is typically accommodated in rear drainage utility easements and property owners tend to do what they think are minor improvements that cause drainage issues. Nolan asked if we would review these requests. Continued Public hearing closed at 9:19 p.m. Motion by Foote, seconded by R. Reid to Approve the Ordinance Amendment related to flag lots, lot frontage, driveway regulations, minimum street grades, and the use of the public easements and rights -of -ways as drafted and conditions within right-of-way. Motion carries unanimously (Absent: V. Reid and Kent Williams). 10. Council Meeting Schedule Nolan to attend and present at the May 21 st, 2013 Council meeting. 11. Adjourn Motion by Osmanski, seconded by R. Reid, to adjourn at 9:22 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. (Absent: V. Reid and Kent Williams) 7