DEEPHAVEN PLANNING COMMISSION

TUESDAY JUNE 19, 2007

7:00 P.M.

Page 1

CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Dyb called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

PRESENT: Chairman Dan Dyb, Commissioners Walter Linder, Jeff McKinney Warren Nelson and Josh Sparber

ABSENT: Commissioner Bob Werneiwski

OTHERS PRESENT: Council Liaison Steve Adams and Zoning Coordinator Gus Karpas

MINUTES OF May 15, 2007

Motion by Commissioner Nelson, second by Commissioner Dyb, to approve the minutes of May 15, 2007 as presented. Motion carried 5-0.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

Special Use Permit – St. Therese Church, 18325 Minnetonka Boulevard, R-3, 20,000 – The applicants are requesting a special use permit to operate a daycare facility within the existing structure.

Zoning Coordinator Karpas reviewed his staff memo. He said the request is to operate a daycare facility, which is permitted under the ordinance with the issuance of a special use permit. The applicants have been approved by the State for up to forty-five children based on the size of the area to be used for the daycare. Based on the number of children permitted, the Church does not qualify for exemptions under the State Statutes which requires cities to view facilities serving twelve or fewer children as a permitted use in residentially zoned districts.

The applicant has indicated that the hours of operation would be between 6:30 am and 6 p.m. They do not intend to place any exterior signage on the property and feel there would be no detrimental affect on traffic in the area. He said he recommended approval of the request saying that the request meets the criteria required for a special use permit in that the use is consistent with the current use of the property, the use would not be discernable from the existing use of the property, it appears the use would not cause any negative effect in terms of health, safety and general welfare of adjacent properties, the use would not significantly alter the existing traffic conditions in the area and the use would not negatively impact the property values of the subject property or those adjacent to it.

Chairman Dyb opened the public hearing. Zoning Coordinator Karpas said he received no comments from the public. Hearing no comment, the public hearing was closed.

Commissioner Linder asked where the daycare operation would be located within the building. Laurie Acker, School Principal, St. Therese School, said the daycare operations would be located in two separate rooms. The initial group of children will number fifteen. She said the children will be housed in the area formerly used as the pre-school. The second room is located under the community room. Linder asked if those dropping off their children would use the main entrance. Ms. Acker said it would depend on the age of the children. There are four entrances to the building, only two would be used for the daycare facilities.

Chairman Dyb said the previous discussion answered his questions. He said he is supportive of the request and that the proposed use is consistent with the existing use of the structure. He feels the operation of a daycare in that location would benefit the community.

Commissioner Nelson agreed with Dyb’s comments and supports the request.

Commissioner Sparber asked about the capacity of the school and whether the addition, potentially, of forty-five children would push the number over the permitted occupancy of the building. Ms. Acker said the school has a permitted occupancy of five hundred children and there are currently only around three hundred and fifty students. Sparber said he is supportive of the request.

Commissioner McKinney had no issues with the request.

ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Linder to recommend that the City Council approve the special use request to operate a daycare facility, as presented at 18325 Minnetonka Boulevard, based on staff’s findings. The proposed use is consistent with the current use of the building and the proposal would not have detrimental affect on the surrounding area. Commissioner Nelson seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0.

Variance – Mark and Susan Weibel, 19150 Rutledge Road, R-3, 20,000 – The applicants are requesting to demolish an existing one stall garage with an attached carport and construct a new attached two-stall garage which would exceed the maximum permitted impervious surface. The requested variance is to exceed the maximum permitted impervious surface area by 5.5%.

Zoning Coordinator Karpas reviewed his staff report. He said the request was to remove the existing garage structure and construct a new garage in its place. The existing garage encroaches into the required side yard setback, due to that encroach, it does not qualify for the reduced setback on the opposite side yard. Because of that, the property is in non-compliance with both of the required side yard setbacks. The proposed garage would comply with the required fifteen foot east side yard setback, bringing the whole property into compliance in terms of setback.

The request is to exceed the maximum permitted impervious surface by 5.5%. The proposed impervious surface is less than what currently exists on the property.

Karpas said he recommended approval for the request based on the size of the lot, which is just over one half the minimum required size for the R-3 District, the existing condition of the garage which warrants repair, the reduction of the impervious surface and that the request would bring the property into compliance with the required setbacks.

Mark Weibel spoke to the request. He said staff accurately presented the request. He said the reason for the request has a lot to do with the condition of the carport, which is in dire need of repair. He believes the proposal would clean up his property and provide needed parking for two cars.

Chairman Dyb opened the public hearing, hearing no public comment; the public hearing was closed.

Commissioner McKinney feels the applicant has presented a good plan and he is supportive of the request.

Commissioner Sparber noted the slight reduction in the impervious surface area and the need to repair the carport. He feels the request would improve the property and is supportive of the request.

Commissioner Nelson said he was concerned with the encroachment of the applicant’s driveway on to the adjacent driveway. Mr. Weibel said the encroachment is only black top and a turn around that they don’t use. He would not have a problem removing it. Nelson said his concern is that it could create future problems. He also noted that the proposed garage is on the small side for today’s standards.

Nelson asked about the fence on the property, which also appears to encroach onto the adjacent property. Mr. Weibel said the fence was in place when he purchased the property. He said he has spoke to the neighbor about the issue, who has said it was not a problem, but he’s concerned about the attitudes of future neighbors. Nelson said he liked the plan and was supportive of the request.

Chairman Dyb said he was supportive of the plan as presented. He feels a one stall garage qualifies as a hardship. He said the existing structure is in need of repair and that the proposed project would remove the existing encroachment into the required side yard setback.

Commissioner Linder said he is supportive of the request for the same reasons expressed by Chairman Dyb.

ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Sparber to recommend that the City Council approve the variance request to exceed the maximum permitted impervious surface area by 5.5% for the proposed garage addition, as presented at 19150 Rutledge Road, based on staff’s findings that a hardship exists in the size of the lot in relation to the required lot area in the R-3 District, the need to replace the garage and that the request would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Commissioner Dyb seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0.

Variance – Todd and Tania Meixner, 4195 Hillcrest Lane, R-2, 40,000 – The applicants are requesting to demolish an existing entry deck and replace it with a new deck and covered entryway which would encroach into the required front yard setback. The requested variance is to encroach twenty-one feet into the required fifty foot front yard setback.

Zoning Coordinator Karpas reviewed his staff report. He said the request was to remove the existing front entryway deck and construct a new deck and covered entryway. He said that the deck has already been removed because the applicant felt it was unsafe. The existing home and deck are built within the required front yard setback. The proposed deck would be pulled up against the home, reducing the existing encroachment by six feet. He said there is a need for an elevated entryway due to the grade in front of the home. The deck provides access to the home from the driveway. The proposed front entryway would provide a protected entry to the home, which currently does not exist.

Karpas said he recommended approval for the request based on the placement of the home within the required front yard setback and that the request would enhance the character of the neighborhood by pulling the deck further back from the street.

Todd Meixner spoke to the request. He apologized for removing the deck. He didn’t know that it would require a variance.

Chairman Dyb opened the public hearing, hearing no public comment; the public hearing was closed.

Commissioner Dyb asked about the retaining walls that were constructed on the property. Mr. Meixner said the retaining walls were installed to carry the water from the street to the side of the house. He said it was necessary to raise the grade because it appeared water was coming from the cul-de-sac into the home. Dyb asked how much fill was used to alter the grade. Mr. Meixner said he was unsure, but that the fill was taken from the rear of the home where the addition is being constructed. Dyb said he is supportive of the request. He said the location of the house in relation to the lay of the land creates development and access difficulties. He noted that a covered entryway may not be hardship, but it is a practical difficulty and adds to the value of the property to provide a protective entryway for the structure.

Commissioner Linder agrees and supports the request. Commissioner McKinney noted that the request pulls the structure back from the road. He supports the request.

Commissioner Sparber said the entire house sits within the required setback and any alteration would require a variance. He said the location of the home and the grade of the property requires the proposed type of access to enter the home. He is supportive of the request.

Commissioner Nelson had not issues with the request.

ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Dyb to recommend that the City Council approve the variance request to encroach twenty-two feet into the required fifty foot front yard setback for the proposed deck and front entryway addition, as presented at 4195 Hillcrest Lane, based on staff’s findings that a hardship exists in the placement of the home on the lot, the need to gain access to the home and that the request would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Commissioner Sparber seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0.

Variance – Mary Jane McGregor, 19440 Lakeview Avenue, R-3, 20,000 – The applicant is requesting to construct a new peaked roof over an existing flat roof and to construct a new deck on the lake side of the home which would encroach into the required lake yard setback, that would encroach into both the east and west side yard setbacks and that would exceed the maximum permitted impervious surface area. The requested variances are to encroach fourteen feet, six inches into the required one hundred foot lake yard setback, to encroach five feet, eleven inches into the required fifteen foot east side yard setback, to encroach eight feet, five inches into the required fifteen foot west side yard setback and to exceed the twenty-five percent maximum impervious surface area by approximately 8.4%.

Zoning Coordinator Karpas reviewed his staff report. He said the request was to construct a pitched roof over the existing flat roof and extend it over a proposed new deck. The proposed new deck would increase the existing encroachment into the required west side yard and lake yard setbacks. The applicant proposes to remove over 15% of the existing impervious surface area by taking out the plastic under the existing landscaping. Even so, the applicant is requesting to exceed the maximum permitted impervious surface by 8.4%.

Karpas said he has some reservations about the project as a whole. He recommended approval for the requests in conjunction with the replacement of the roof since repair issues related to the maintenance of flat roofs are well known and the proposal would alleviate those issues.

He recommended denial for the variance requests related to the construction of the deck and the extension of the roof over the deck. He doesn’t believe the applicant has demonstrated an undue hardship in that the need to access the rear of the property in the manner is which the applicant is seeking is based on structural alterations the applicant is doing to the home. More specifically, the alteration removing the existing windows and replacing them with French doors. He feels that even though the adjacent properties have similar decks encroaching into the required lake yards, he’s concerned the proposed roof lends itself to future enclosure of the area and potentially future requests for a lake side deck once that has been done, creating a creeping effect. Staff believes the request is more aesthetic and economic in nature.

Jane McGregor spoke to the request. She presented renderings of the existing and proposed facades. She said the house has not been improved since it was constructed in 1967. She said the flat roof has presented a continual problem and the request would alleviate that issue. She feels the proposal would enhance the neighborhood.

Chairman Dyb opened the public hearing.

Judy Allen Kim, 20000 Lakeview Avenue, said her mother owns the property directly west of the subject property. She is concerned about further encroachment into the west side yard setback. She said the structure already has a substantial encroachment into that yard. She is also concerned about the level of impervious surface on the property.

Hearing no further public comment; the public hearing was closed.

Rob Pearson, the applicant’s contractor, said the proposal has two objectives. The first is to replace the flat roof with a peaked roof and extend the overhang towards the lake to help shade the lakeside of the structure. He said this approach is more energy efficient. The second objective was to provide direct access from the home to the lakeside of the home.

Chairman Dyb said he notes a lot of concern about the pitch of the roof. He asked if any thought had been given to putting a pitch over the entire structure. Ms. McGregor said that most of the structure, aside from the garage, already has a pitch.

Commissioner Linder said he is concerned about the additional encroachments proposed on the lakeside property for the deck and roof overhang. He feels given the nature of the property, the design is unreasonable. He is not opposed generally to some of the changes needed to correct the existing roof issues, but not with an expansion of the roof beyond the existing structure.

Chairman Dyb said the lot is approximately half of the minimum required lot area for the R-3 District, so any type of development is going to be tough. He said the request appears to be pushing the boundaries of what the property can handle. He said the property currently has a deck right on the lake, which is a huge benefit in that it is unique. He has a problem finding a hardship or practical difficulty for the further encroachments into the required setbacks, though he does support an alteration to the roof over the existing structure.

Commissioner Nelson said he has concerns about the entire project, including the roof alteration over the existing structure. He’s concerned that the pitch of the roof would increase the amount of runoff onto adjacent properties. He does not support the request for the deck or the extension of the roof over the deck. In terms of the roof alteration, he has questions on how it would be placed over the existing home, especially the area around the three season porch.

Chairman Dyb said he is trying to look at the issues facing the property in the future, like the need for a two-stall garage, since the property currently has only a one-stall garage. The property is already over the maximum permitted impervious surface, without the proposed alteration. Future needs of the property would only worsen the non-conformance if this request were approved.

Ms. McGregor asked if it would be possible to terrace the property in lieu of a deck to gain access to the proposed French doors. Zoning Coordinator Karpas said retaining walls within the required lake yard setback are permitted, but cannot exceed three feet in height. He said gaining the grade necessary to access the doors is not the issue, rather the excess of impervious surface creates a problem.

Mr. Pearson asked if it would make a difference if the deck were placed over existing impervious surface. Commissioner McKinney said there would be a difference since the existing impervious surface would be at grade and the deck would be elevated.

Commissioner Sparber said he supports staff’s recommendation for denial and his feelings mirror those already expressed by the other Commissioners. He said the request to pitch the roof over the existing flat roof add value to the structure with the addition of usable space. He supports an alteration to the roof over the existing structure, but not the requested encroachments for the proposed deck.

Commissioner McKinney agrees that there is a need to improve the roof situation, but he too has issues with the deck request.

Commissioner Sparber questioned the Commission’s ability to act on the deck and roof over the existing structure separately. Zoning Coordinator Karpas said he split the request up in that manner, feeling that there’s a quantifiable area, in terms of the existing structure, in which the roof could be altered.

The Commission discussed the option of permitting the roof, but denying the deck. Commissioner Linder feels that the request should be taken as a whole since that is how the application was presented to the Commission. Chairman Dyb agreed and noted that without a specific plan for the roof alteration, it is possible the design may end up quite different than the Commission envisions.

Ms. McGregor questioned if the Commission’s concern was not so much with the deck, rather if it were for the proposed extension of the roof. Commissioner McKinney said he’s not in favor of the deck addition, that he’s not in favor of the roof expansion and not in favor of altering the grade in lieu of a deck to gain access to the lakeside of the home. He said that, even though the roof issue needs to be addressed, the request for the Commission needs to be acted on as a whole.

Chairman Dyb said the roof overhang is an issue, but the deck itself and the related encroachments are also an issue. He feels the property can be put to a reasonable use without the granting of the variances. He said the applicant already has access to the lakeside of the home and already has a deck on the property.

Chairman Dyb explained to the applicant that it appears the Commission would vote to recommend denial of the request. He said she has a number of options on how to proceed. He said she could table the request and present a new plan to the Commission at a later day, she could withdraw the request or she could ask for a vote and proceed on to the City Council.

Zoning Coordinator Karpas discussed the city’s requirements under the 60-day rule outlined in the State Statutes. He said that even though the city can extend that period by an additional sixty days, the applicant and the city would be better served not to rush into altered plans that they would be forced to act on.

Mr. Pearson said the applicant would obviously want to proceed to the City Council with a recommendation for approval. Ms. McGregor said she wants to improve the aesthetics of the property by changing the existing picture windows to French doors, which would provide better flow throughout the home.

Zoning Coordinator Karpas explained the city’s responsibilities under the State Statutes in terms of reviewing variance requests. He said the Statute explicitly states that the aesthetic desires of a property owner are not grounds in approving a variance. He said the city has been consistent in discouraging further encroachment into the required lake yard setback. He said in order to approve a variance the city must find that a unique situation exists on a property and that the property cannot be reasonably used without the granting of a variance. He said meeting that standard is difficult with a request like the one before the Commission.

Council Liaison Adams said his comments do not necessarily reflect the views of the entire Council, but noted that Council typically weighs the action taken by the Planning Commission when reviewing requests. He reiterated the point that the city has not been historically supportive of increased encroachments into the lake yard setback.

Ms. McGregor informed the Commission that she would like to withdraw her application at this time to allow for her to investigate different alternatives.

NEW BUSINESS

Planning Commission Vacancy –

The Planning Commission discussed the status of Joan Budd and her seat on the Commission. Chairman Dyb said he tried to contact Ms. Budd on a number of occasions, but was not successful. It is believed that Ms. Budd has moved from the city.

Zoning Coordinator Karpas said that he has had discussions with the City Administrator and Mayor about this issue. He said that he invited Barbara Jean Brandt, who is in the audience tonight, to the meeting as an interested candidate.

The Commission discussed whether they would like to interview Ms. Brandt and make a recommendation to the Council. Some Commissioners questioned whether others had been given an opportunity to apply for the vacancy. It was noted that a notice had been placed in a recent newsletter encouraging citizens to submit applications for the various boards and committees. The Commission decided to allow Ms. Brandt the opportunity to speak to her interest on serving on the Commission.

Ms. Brandt said that she is a six year resident of the city and during that time has noticed developments throughout the city that have concerned her. She would like the opportunity to serve the community. Chairman Dyb asked if there were any concerns regarding travel associated with her employment. Ms. Brandt said there was, but that it was flexible and she would schedule her travel around her responsibilities to the Commission.

Commissioner Sparber asked if there was anything that happened at tonight’s meeting that “scared” her. Ms. Brandt said that she needs to be better educated in the terminology and processes employed by the Commission. She used the example of the Special Use Permit and questioned whether that was a blanket permit or were there requirements for renewal. She also expressed some concern about the discussion that took place between Ms. McGregor and the Commission on her options. Zoning Coordinator Karpas said that discussion was not typical in that applicants usually don’t have that much confusion in the apprehension of the Commission to thier request and their options to table the request, proceed to the Council or withdraw the request.

Chairman Dyb said apprehension is normal and that it took some time for him to feel comfortable with the ordinance to the point he could apply it to specific requests. Zoning Coordinator Karpas added that he was available to any Commissioner that had questions on the ordinance or any applications included in the packet.

Chairman Dyb asked about any past experiences similar to serving on the Planning Commission. Ms. Brandt said she has not and that’s why she feels it’s important to educate herself on the ordinances and the issues facing the city. She said that she lived on the New Jersey coast and is familiar with the effects of major changes on the quality and aesthetics of waterfront areas. She believes there are similarities between the issues there and those in Minnesota and Deephaven particularly.

Commissioner Linder asked if Ms. Brandt owned property within the city outside of her home. She said she did not.

Commissioner Nelson commented that it was nice to see an applicant that takes the time to come to City Hall and participate in the process.

The Commission thanked Ms. Brandt for her time.

Comprehensive Plan Update – Discuss draft copy of Comprehensive Plan revisions.

Zoning Coordinator Karpas said the purpose of the discussion was to review any proposed changes the Commission felt should be done to the Comprehensive Plan.

Commissioner Linder asked about the requirement for Occupancy Certificate (page 16) for commercial businesses in the city and whether that process was currently in place. Zoning Coordinator Karpas said the ordinance requires that a Zoning Compliance application be completed prior to the occupancy of any commercial space in the city. He said there are some issues with the process since property owners are not informing perspective tenants of that requirement.

Linder asked about the Feasibility Study (page 51) done for the installation of a municipal water system and asked if the results should be included in the plan. Karpas said he would look into it. Linder asked about the availability of well testing kits (page 53). Karpas said the city used to provide the kits to the homeowners, who would then send them into the County for analysis. He believes that service was terminated because the city was unable to keep up with the demand for the testing kits. He said he would investigate if the program could be restarted.

Commissioner Nelson asked about the tree preservation requirements in the plan and why they were not put into the city ordinances. He also asked if there should be added discussion on the St. Therese property about the specific allowances for the property outlined in the adopted Planned Unit Development ordinance.

Chairman Dyb and Commissioner McKinney had not major concerns.

Commissioner Sparber expressed concern about specifically noting that the St. Therese property would be used for senior housing. Zoning Coordinator Karpas said that was the intent for that property and the Sullivan property when it was included in the Comprehensive Plan. Unfortunately, when the Planned Unit Development ordinance was drafted, it was done in a way that made the development of those properties more conducive to market rate homes.

Karpas said he would look at the issues raised and follow up with the Commission.

LIAISON REPORT

Council Liaison Adams said the Council discussed four items that were before the Commission. The Council approved the Special Use Permit for the Deephaven Elementary School, the Variance request for the Snows on Summerville and the Variances and Special Use requests for Stonehenge. He said the discussion at the Planning Commission was very comprehensive and was helpful in his presentation to the Council.

He said the last item the Council took action on was the request by Mark Kawell for a final plat. He said the discussion was rather lengthy and covered a number of issues. He said the Council approved the request with a number of conditions including that the developer provide a minimum three off-street parking spaces for each lot and that the Developer work with the City Assessor to determine the valuation of the property for Park Dedication fee purposes.

OTHER BUSINESS

Council Liaison Adams asked the Commission’s opinion on the appointment of a new Commissioner. Did they feel comfortable with Ms. Brandt or did they wish to expand their search.

Commissioner Nelson said that he has seen Ms. Brandt at various meetings, indicating that she’s willing to participate in the process. He said it would be nice to have a Commissioner from the Cottagewood neighborhood.

Commissioner Linder agrees that it’s not necessary to expand the search provided that others were given the opportunity to express their interest in the Commission. Based on her interview, he would support the appointment of Ms. Brandt.

Commissioner Sparber is concerned about expanding the search and potentially going with another candidate that may not place a priority on service to the Commission.

Motion by Dyb to recommend the City Council appoint Barbara Jean Brandt to the Planning Commission to fill the vacancy created by Commissioner Joan Budd. Commissioner Sparber seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0.

ADJOURNMENT

Motion by Commissioner Dyb to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner McKinney seconded. The motion carried 5-0. The meeting adjourned at 9:25 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Gus Karpas

Zoning Coordinator