Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3 July 18, 2016 Meeting Minutes rough draft 1 PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Monday, July 18, 2016 1. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance: Commissioner Fleming called the Monday, July 18, 2016 Prior Lake Planning Commission meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Those present were Commissioners Bryan Fleming, Mark Petersen and Bill Kallberg; Wade Larson arrived at 6:30 P.M. Also present were Director Dan Rogness, City Planner Jeff Matzke, Engineer Larry Poppler and Service Assistant Sandra Woods. 2. Approval of Agenda: MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECONDED BY KALLBERG TO APPROVE THE MONDAY, JULY 18, 2016 PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Petersen and Kallberg. Tieman and Larson absent. The Motion carried. 3. Approval of Tuesday, July 5, 2016 Meeting Minutes: MOTION BY KALLBERG, SECONDED BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE THE TUESDAY, JULY 5, 2016 PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Petersen and Kallberg. Tieman and Larson absent. The Motion carried. 4. Public Hearings: A. DEV16-000003 – Olson Addition Combined Preliminary and Final Plat - Steven Olson is proposing a combined preliminary and final plat to be known as Olson Addition of 4 lots. The Subject property is located at 3111 – 176th Street SW in the Low Density Residential (R-1) Zoning District. PID: 25-910-019-0. Planner Matzke introduced the request for the Combined Preliminary and Final Plat to be known as Olson Addition to be developed as a four lot, low density residential subdivision. The subject property is located south of Langford Boulevard (State Trunk Highway 13) and west of Sunray Boulevard. He explained the history, current circumstances, issues, alternatives and recommended motion. He said the applicant would like to proceed with only the preliminary plat. He presented a location map, development plans dated July 11, 2016, Community and Economic Development Department Memorandum dated July 12, 2016 and an Engineering/Public Works Department memorandum dated July 12, 2016. Commission Comments/Questions: Fleming asked what is the timing of the WCA review and when the City receive their commentary. Planner Matzke replied within the next few weeks; they have already been under review for this before. He explained the Wetland Delineation has been approved, the impacts are under review, very minor impact scenario and review from the State Rules and Regulations. Fleming asked about the review coming back to them if something that we didn’t anticipate; even though it is preliminary and the applicant doesn’t want final plat approval at this time. Planner Matzke said correct and believes it would in the case of impacting lot areas. He gave examples. Fleming said regardless of what the WCA review is; he would like the Commission to receive an update on the outcome. He is a little concerned about the proximity of Lot 4. Kallberg questioned Lot 4; and commented on the setback requirement remaining, the building pad, wetland boundary and the wetland impact and asked if there are any mitigation requirements. 2 Planner Matzke explained how the W ater Research Engineer reviews these impact areas and where the impact is being made; he pointed out where the area of impact. He said it is altered in the hydrology of the wetland and how much area of impact that it falls under for the wetland conservation act rules; was told that this is still meeting those conditions, it has not been formally approved yet, but it is on the tract to be doing so. Kallberg asked about wetland drainage between two existing homes; Lots 3 and 4 to the North. Engineer Poppler explained the emergency overflow for this wetland complex. Kallberg clarified we are only considering a preliminary plat involving what is shown here as Lots, 2, 3 and 4 of Block 1. Planner Matzke said that would be correct. Petersen questioned if Thornton Drive (167th) potentially will be go out to meet Highway 13. Planner Matzke said it would extend further to the west and explained the road situation of when Maple Glen Additions were being completed; stating Thornton Drive would probably not connect with Highway 13; from what we have been told from the State of Minnesota Department of Transportation. Petersen asked the way this is laid out it wouldn’t cause a problem for eliminating the access point. Planner Matzke replied for Lots 2,3,4; no. He explained it is pretty much set up by the existing Lots to the south. He commented on how the road, a right-of-way that is already in existence and the future development Petersen questioned wetland drainage; on a normal rainfall it would not drain through this wetland. Engineer Poppler explained how the emergency overflow. Petersen questioned the additional impervious surface in adding three houses and asked if this impervious surface was factored in for overflow running across the other properties. Engineer Poppler said it shouldn’t make a lot of difference to that wetland. Applicant: Steven Olson, property owner. He explained what they are anticipating to do. He commented on the impact to the wetland, the area on the side of Lot 4, exemption of wetland rules, overflow from having a large storm, bigger wetland as it is now, drainage from the farm fields (Maple Glen 2), used to be a beautiful wetland with wildlife, ground cover, woods with oak trees, saving of certain trees, development/building time lines and said he is getting the preliminary plat approved and selling the Lot with conservation easements in place. MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECONDED BY KALLBERG TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON 4A AT 6:25 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Petersen and Kallberg. Larson and Tieman absent. The Motion carried. Public Comment: Jon Meyer, (3332 Thornton Drive SW). He complemented the plan and asked what a minimal impact means and when was the map created. He questioned the schematics it is based on and the size of the wetland on the map versus in actuality and wonders how the fourth house will fit with a minimal Impact. Megan McMahon, (3332 Thornton Drive SW). She stated if you look at the overhead aerial satellite image, it appears physically impossible to fit a house on Lot 4, without impacting less than a few feet of the wetland. Jon Meyer stated these schematics are extremely favorable for position a house on there; however, our opinion is dependent on when this was drafted. Fleming asked for some interpretation on the accuracy and veracity of these renderings. Engineer Poppler explained the GIS is not exactly on the property lines; and explained the plan used is a survey by a professional surveying company. He stated the date of the grading plans and explained how to define the wetland edges; wetland delineation. He commented on the wetland edge being verified by the City and how it falls into certain categories to be a wetland, timeline of wetland delineation, wetland 3 buffer, grading and stated he is unsure of when the wetland was delineated; however, stated we could ask the applicant as well. Petersen asked with the setbacks refer to the wetland or the wetland buffer. Planner Matzke said the setbacks are from the wetland delineated edge and explained the buffer area. He commented on the brown buffer area signs and the yard of house number four. Petersen clarified, you can build by a buffer, but cannot change it. Planner Matzke said yes, and explained the difference between the buffer and setbacks. Petersen asked if this property has been staked out. Planner Matzke said there probably has been survey stakes of the boundaries of the property; however, not staked for housing. Petersen asked not for housing, just for property lines. Planner Matzke said there might be some stakes if engineers or surveying team has been doing some work, and explained sometimes the stakes above ground do move a bit. Petersen stated that would be nice to see what it is looking like. Megan McMahon questioned the wetland impact. She asked what guarantee do we have that this will be a minimal impact and wont impact the wetland. Petersen asked which way does the water drain; is it draining into the drain sewer instead of the wetland. Engineer Poppler said yes, correct and explained the Maple Glen Second Addition impact on the wetland and the wetland mitigation off of Turner Drive and south of Thorton. Petersen asked if they anticipated this wetland being effected in some way with the second addition. Engineer Poppler replied explaining wetlands on the Maple Glen Second Addition; impacted and needed to be litegated. Petersen asked Staff’s opinion if this wetland is going to shrink, get smaller and dry up due to these three additional Lots. Engineer Poppler said no he doesn’t believe so. Fleming questioned until we get commentary from the WCA? Jon Meyer requested to see the completed review and requested a worse/best case scenario for minimal percentage. He would like to know the meaning/definitions of what the maximum impact would be. Fleming said we won’t be in a position to give a definitive response until we see the WCA commentary. If the impacts are deemed to be more significant than what we are anticipating, it will come back to us. Engineer Poppler said we are hopeful it would generate more water to the wetland and explained the back area of the project. Olson answered questions on wetland delineation date and process, surveys dates and additional water/less water flowing into wetland; wetland improved from development of lots. Fleming said if this goes forward he would like to see or know that Staff has reviewed the subsists of that meeting that was referred by Mr. Olson in writing. Planner Matzke commented on the one of the conditions that is listed on the report. MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECONDED BY KALLBERG, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON 4A AT 6:40 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Larson, Petersen and Kallberg. Tieman absent. The Motion carried. Commission Comments/Questions: Petersen stated he has concern of Lot four; when he first saw the map he thought it was close and now he understands the difference between wetlands and buffers. He said Lot four will look out his window and see wetland grass right there. He said another concern was the drainage towards the norther lots; however, it sounds like this wetland is quite a bit less than it was, so it is not a concern. He said it appears that Mr. Olson has this pretty well thought out and he seems like a good steward of the land, which is reassuring. He stated he is not a water expert, but it appears that because of the streets that are there the infrastructure is already there, he doesn’t see it getting worse, probably will be getting better just from the impervious. He stated he is in support of approving this preliminary plat 4 Kallberg stated on the preliminary plat on the three Lots is an acceptable land in connection with the long list of conditions that are attached by staff in our report. Larson asked for any new information and stated looking at the buffer zone, he believes there is a retaining wall on house number four; he believes everything will be reviewed. He is in favor of supporting. Fleming stated he is in favor of supporting the application subject to the listed conditions by Staff and with written commentary/interpretation of the meeting that has been held and any subsequence meetings that will be held by the WCA. He stated the preliminary plat does meet the thresholds. MOTION BY PETEREN, SECONDED BY KALLBERG TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR OLSON ADDITION SUBJECT TO THE LIST OF CONDITIONS AT 6:45 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Larson, Petersen and Kallberg. Tieman absent. The Motion carried. B. DEV16-001019 – 4342 Bass Street – Variance - The applicant is requesting a variance from the side yard abutting a street setback to construct a new home located at 4342 Bass Street in the Low Density Residential Shoreland (R1-SD) Zoning District. PID: 25-043-001-0. Planner Matzke introduced the request for approval of a variance from the minimum side yard abutting a street setback for a property in the R-1 (Low Density Residential) Zoning District located at 4342 Bass Street SE. The property is located along the eastern shores of Upper Prior Lake, at the intersection of Bass Street and West Avenue. He explained the history, current circumstances, issues, alternatives and recommended motion. He presented a resolution, location map, survey dated June 14, 2016 and a surveying indicating buildable area. Commission Comments/Questions: Kallberg what is the date of the original plat and is this part of the original Sunfish Bay. Planner Matzke replied he believed it to be1925 is the original plat and yes it is part of Sunfish Bay. Larson questioned the invert. Planner Matzke pointed out a storm sewer at the northeast corner and explained the draining to the Lake as well as a pipe that runs underground stating that is the request of the easement. Larson asked if someone else owned the adjacent parcel. Planner Matzke said this invert would be in the right-of-way. Applicant: Mike Larson, (18351 Kenyon Avenue, Lakevile). He talked of placement of trees on West Avenue. Kallberg mentioned two communications from neighbors, stating they would like the applicant to understand that the shoreline area is a shared waterfront for joint use of Lot owners. Mike Larson said they are aware of that. MOTION BY LARSON, SECONDED BY PETERSEN TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON 4B AT 6:55 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Larson, Petersen and Kallberg. Tieman Absent. The Motion carried. Public Comment: Linda Coffman, (15901 Sunfish Trail SE) She stated she owns two properties on Sunfish Bay and questioned public access down by the culvert. She talked about a no trespassing, a dug out in the bushes for public access by the culvert and the public road to the beach. She asked if she can still use the beach. Fleming pointed out the area on an overhead picture and he clarified Mrs. Coffman’s question. Planner Matkze explained where the applicant is planning on grading and stated there is no changes proposed or no legal changes to where Ms. Coffman is asking about (where West Avenue boarders along the lake). 5 Coffman asked if the culvert and the tree could be repaired. She talked about needing an appointment to talk to anyone at the City. MOTION BY KALLBERG, SECONDED BY PETERSEN TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON 4B AT 7:00 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Larson, Petersen and Kallberg. Tieman Absent. The Motion carried. Commission Comments/Questions: Kallberg said he visited this site and there is a wide boulevard where the setback would impact; for all practical purposes, any part of West Avenue north of Bass Street becomes pretty much a two party driveway there. He said there is a platting that shows that West would go all the way across and connect to a block to the east but that likelihood of ever becoming a street there is long gone because of homes that have been built, so it becomes two driveways that extend off the end of West Avenue, in fact it appears that the sanitary sewer that would normally be the center line of the street is actually under the curb of the west side of the street so the roadway is essentially all in the easterly part of the right-of-way, so the applicant gains some space, boulevard space, that otherwise would not occur if the street was built in the normal manner. He said the age of this plat really makes it strange that the platting is showing 4 Lots on the current plat, but there was more, probably all the same size so it looks like to the last person got the last narrow piece of five Lots. He said it would be a good improvement to replace the little cabin with some nice homes. Larson said it would be an improvement on this buildable Lot and with the other easements and understanding that they are being careful, having the ten-foot easement for being able to fix any difficulties that may be occurring with the underground discharger from the watermain/drain. He is in favor of this. Petersen stated based on the comments of his fellow Commissioners and the size of the variance; this is a decent request for a Lot that has tough restrictions. He said he will be supporting this variance request. Fleming will be supporting the variance request; it does meet the five-point threshold, and will be a welcome addition to the area. Petersen asked about the condition of approval; easement. Planner Matzke said this conditional of approval is on page three. Kallberg asked if the City could look into the tree health/concrete trough, including proper maintenance. MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECONDED BY LARSON TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION APPROVING THE REQUESTED VARIANCE FOR 4243 BASS STREET SE SUBJECT TO THE LISTED CONDITIONS OF REFERENCE TO THE EASEMENT AT 7:07 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Larson, Petersen and Kallberg. Tieman Absent. The Motion carried. C. DEV16-001020 – SMSC – CUP - SMSC is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for land reclamation and grading on a property located south of County Road 82 and north of Stemmer Ridge Road in the Agricultural (A) Zoning District. PID’s: 25-904-016-0; 25-904-017-0; 25-904- 018-0; 25-904-019-0; 25-905-017-0; 25-905-018-0; 25-905-020-0. Larry Poppler introduced the request to consider a conditional use permit to allow grading and land reclamation in excess of 400 cubic yards on a site along Howard Lake Road, south of the intersection of County Highway 82 and Mystic Lake Boulevard. The project calls for the importing of up to one hundred thousand cubic yards of material and grading the site. He explained the current circumstances, issues, alternatives and recommended motion. He presented a resolution, location map, City Public Works Staff memorandum dated July 14, 2016 and project plans stamp dated June 17, 2016. Commission Comments/Questions: 6 Kallberg said what we see now as a rather large farm field; we are now looking at big areas that will become wetlands again, that maybe were once upon a time. And that is the whole area that is without streets and building lots. Larry Poppler explained the wetland area, restoring wetland and grading low areas. Kallberg questioned if the whole area would otherwise remain undeveloped. Larry Poppler said yes and explained how the grade would be moved. Larson questioned the deeded trust with the Federal Government and going through the hoops for wetlands and such. Larry Poppler he said they would still need to go through wetland approvals, but City Staff would not be necessary. Petersen asked if all the soil was coming from the property, he asked about the soil from a wetland being full of vegetation; what can you use with that as you cannot build houses or roads on it. Larry Poppler said there will be some soil that will not be usable for the pads for the Lots, but explained other green areas that they use that soil for. Petersen asked if there is monitoring of the soil. Larry Poppler said yes, through a grading permit and through that permit we would monitor manly the erosion control, but they also have their best interest in building the pads properly for the support of the Lots themselves. City Staff primarily look at drainage and erosion control when issuing the permit. Fleming asked if SMSC has made application in 2016 or 2015 Larry Poppler said 2015. Fleming asked how long the review process took. Larry Poppler replied it can be 200 days, it can be a year and a half to two years, depending on the Federal Government work load as well as the specifics of the application. Applicant Ken Adolf, (2638 Shadow Lane, Chaska). He stated he is with Bolton and Mink and Engineers for SMSC. He emphasized where the soil is going and the south portion of the project. He said there is top soil needed throughout the plan. He mentioned the thicker section of topsoil, wetland mitigation, wetland alteration, conservation easement will be protected and monitoring grading with geotechnical engineer as well. He gave an overview of the proposed wetland impacts on the County Road 83, (improvement project in the Mystic Lake area). Larson asked for a little more depth on the proposed conservation easement that he was referring to. Adolf explained the conservation easement stating no one is interested in holding the easement. Kallberg asked there is another project underway on 154th street county road 82; we had nothing to do with that, was that land that was in trust. Adolf said yes it is in trust already. The community didn’t need to come to the City with approvals. Kallberg said we had no authority over that parcel. Engineer Poppler said correct. MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECONDED BY KALLBERG TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON AGENDA ITEM 4C AT 7:23 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Larson, Petersen and Kallberg. Tieman Absent. The Motion carried. Public Comment: Philip Pitcher, (16263 Stemmer Ridge Road). He commented on his location and had concerns of time of notice, hydrology, effect of water flow, the consequences of what is being proposed, impacts of personal property and the little lake. He stated this needs to be considered more before moving hundreds of thousands of cubic feet around. Fleming asked if the mailing met the Statutory Requirements. Engineer Poppler suggested that would be a better question for Planner Matzke 7 Service Assisant Woods said that she sent it out and it did meet the Statutory Requirements. Fleming asked Engineer Poppler if he had any comments or commentary regarding the hydrology concerns; from the report it appears that ample consideration was given to hydrology. Engineer Poppler said that is the reason the Corps and the DNR are looking at this; the full review wasn’t included. He said as all of these things are reviewed and looked at, what we are looking at is the placement of fill on the other pieces of the land; it all ties together, but certainly as a conditions or part of his memo is to finish the process with the Corps of Engineers. Fleming asked Mr. Pitcher if that is clear. Pitcher said no. Fleming said if the conditions are not met the project doesn’t continue, and asked Mr. Pitcher if that was clear to him. Pitcher said no. Fleming asked Mr. Pitcher what is not clear; so he could help him understand. Pitcher said this is the first he had seen of this and commented on the road. Fleming said the issue if the hydrology issues are being dealt with. Pitcher said he sees no engineering or technical notes given from the engineer. Fleming mentioned making an appointment with Mr. Poppler the City Engineer to go through the hydrology memorandum and conditions. He iterated that the notice was Statutorily met and stated he appreciated Mr. Pitchers desire to have more dialog. He said the hydrology concerns have been noted and are a condition. He said his concerns are being heard and are a condition of approval. Pitcher asked who is the person that would oversee hydrology conditions are observed Engineer Poppler said the resource engineer on staff reviews these types of applications; in this situation with the wetland restoration project there is an additional process that must be followed with the Corps of Engineers and the DNR. Pitcher reiterated the Corps of Engineers will look at this, okay. Petersen asked Engineer Poppler what his advice to residents in this area if they have specific engineering questions; who should they talk to. Engineer Poppler replied Staff can certainly go over any materials with any person of interest by appointment. Petersen stated that is what he would recommend and asked Mr. Pitcher if he has pursued this option at all. Pitcher explained more concerns of pushing for a road in this environment, four lane highway, public need, five options with only two to vote on and the ones that live in the development will be wiped out. He said he doesn’t have much faith in the process; as he will be the one to lose money on his property. Fleming stated there are conditions in place and we invite you to set up a time with City Staff to review. Lori Helgestad, (2030 Edgewood Drive NW). She said her property abuts the area that is going to be developed; and asked about the environmental effect to the eagle’s nest that is adjacent to the property. Engineer Poppler said part of the trust application includes an EAW; this process is between the SMSC and Federal Government and is looked at as a part of the trust application. Fleming asked if this is open to request of our SMSC neighbors that they make the results of the EAW review available. Engineer Poppler said yes it is a very open public process; and offered a link to the EAW . Helgestad said there is someone from the Tribe is aware that eagles nest is there and would be sad if the eagles moved on. She said she is sure the Tribe cares about the eagle’s but it would be nice to know their outcome. Gail Whipple, (1611 – 161st Street East, Spring Lake Township). She said her property abuts the entire western side of the map. She mirrored a couple of the same concerns as the last speaker regarding hydrology is extremely fragile and has the same concerns with moving that much dirt. MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECONDED BY KALLBERG TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON AGENDA ITEM 4C AT 7:37 P.M VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Larson, Petersen and Kallberg. Tieman Absent. The Motion carried. 8 Commission Comments/Questions: Petersen stated he appreciates all comments and said this is going to have a huge impact; however, there has been some kind of project that has been planned all along, which is why the road ends there. He said but with making a balance of the people living there and having their property rights respected he appreciates that and would encourage any residents, especially those that have any engineering questions to get a hold of Engineer Poppler and he can get you to that information. He said as it stands right now we are talking about moving dirt from point A to point B and what he is seeing is it is actually increasing the wetlands; the total amount of wetlands and doesn’t see any reason to oppose it, so he is in support. Kallberg stated there are significant concerns to extend the road of Stemmer Ridge Road through this previously privately owned property up to 154th Street and ultimately one of the main entries into the Mystic Lake Complex. He said there has also been a lot of controversy about the issue of the Trust Lands that the SMSC has processed over the last number of years and that this is one of those pieces that is currently in process. He commented on an article in last week’s paper that the Tribe has put out bids for the work to be done and the agreement with the City and the SMSC for construction and ultimate ownership and maintenance of the sewer and water facilities. He asked if he was correct on this. Engineer Poppler explained the cost share agreement after the bids are received that will moralize that further. Kallberg said he is also aware in previous communications with representatives of SMSC from his days on the watershed board and have to say that they are highly committed to conservation, ecology, water quality. There efforts are for example artic lake, they are a partner in the operation and maintenance of the Prior Lake outlet channel, because Tribal lands use this as a storm water conveyance. So he admires this effort to restore a wetland and knows that it can be extremely expensive. The watershed did one a few years ago on the southwesterly part of the water shed and believes it was like two acres and costed around two hundred thousand dollars to restore that wetland. This is not something they are taking lightly. With all the engineering overview between our City and consultants for SMSC we do have the water resource engineer who has also looked at this; he doesn’t see any way to not accept this CUP application. Larson stated he too, echoes commissioner Kallberg comments regarding the Sioux Community being very environmental and conscious of what they are doing; seeing that and with the conservation easement he is in support. Fleming stated as all of the fellow Commissioners stated this is a sensitive project for many reasons; he would like the developer or owner/applicant, (SMSC) along with their Engineering experts hold community dialog every forty-five to sixty days; this is not a prescribe condition, rather a very strong recommendation and he feels very strongly that the SMSC would honor that. He said as a way to proactively keep community members and neighbors whose property abuts the land in question up to date, so our residents don’t have to go hunting and pecking. He stated there should be an intentional collaboration between the SMSC and the residents as the project is moving forward. He said the CUP does meet the eight-point threshold and analysis, the conditions are very appropriate, very tight conditions and he is confident that the City can partnership with the SMSC to make sure the conditions are honored. MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECONDED BY KALLBERG TO APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST SUBJECT TO THE FIVE LISTED CONDITIONS AT 7:45 PM. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Larson, Petersen and Kallberg. Tieman Absent. The Motion carried. D. DEV16-001021 – 16072 Eagle Creek Avenue SE – Variance - The property owners are requesting a variance from the lake setback to convert an existing deck into an enclosed room located at 16072 Eagle Creek Avenue SE in the Low Density Residential Shoreland (R1-SD) Zoning District. PID: 25-096-031-0. Director Rogness introduced the request to consider approving a resolution approving a variance from the minimum lakeshore structure setback at 16072 Eagle Creek Avenue. The property includes an 9 existing house located along the easterly shore of Upper Prior lake. He explained the history, current circumstances, issues, alternatives and recommended motion. He presented a location map, survey dated March 14, 2016, building plans and site photo. Commission Comments/Questions: Petersen asked about the house to the north’s setback from the lake. Director Rogness said it is fifty feet. Petersen commented on the house on the south’s setback and asked if you split the difference what would that be. Director Rogness explained the setbacks. Kallberg asked to review the picture of the house on the lakeside. He commented on the upper level and the overhang. He said the setback was based on the nearest point of the house, not foundation. Director Rogness said yes. He presented and explained the pictures from the neighbor’s house. MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECONDED BY LARSON TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON 4D AT 7:55 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Larson, Petersen and Kallberg. Tieman Absent. The Motion carried. Applicant: Ron Brazier, (16072 Eagle Creek Avenue SE). He said he is trying to accomplish to finish the house and wanted the deck area to be enclosed to be a dining area. The room that enters from the lake has given them issues in the past and it would be nice to have the lower area better. The picture was taken from the neighbor to the south and his neighbor doesn’t oppose. Public Comment: Dean Leaf, (16084 Eagle Creek Avenue SE). He said he is the house to the south and has no objections; perfectly fine. He commented on a tree and on how the Brazier’s are great neighbors. Luke Brazier, (16058 Eagle Creek Avenue SE). He said he is the neighbor to the north, he doesn’t oppose. He said it is a modest addition and they support it. MOTION BY PETERSEN SECONDED BY LARSON TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON 4D AT 7:59 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Larson, Petersen and Kallberg. Tieman Absent. The Motion carried. Commission Comments/Questions: Kallberg stated he doesn’t find this at all objectionable; a room nine by twelve is pretty minimal and an extra couple of feet will certainly make it more usable and there are no issues with any of the neighbors, the obstruction of the view is almost impossible to invasion. He stated he has no problem with this variance. Larson he agrees with Commissioner Kallberg’s comments with the extra two feet for the room being more useable space. He said this doesn’t overly impede and commented on the setback of sixty-one feet. He stated he is in favor. Petersen stated it is great that the neighbors are here and talked of future neighbors not even having an issue with this. He touched base on having a flat roof in Minnesota and how that would be an issue. He stated he supports this variance. Fleming stated he is supporting the variance request; clearly meets the five-point threshold of 1108.400. 10 MOTION BY KALLBERG, SECONDED BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION APPROVING A FOURTEEN FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM LAKESHORE SETBACK AT 16072 EAGLE CREEK AVENUE AT 8:04 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Larson, Petersen and Kallberg. Tieman Absent. The Motion carried. 5. Old Business: A. DEV15-001001 – Charlie’s on Prior – Ordinance Amendment – The property owner is proposing an amendment to an ordinance related to limitations on outdoor music at Charlie’s on Prior, located at 3950 & 3931 Green Heights Trail SW in the Medium Density Residential Shoreland (R2-SD) Zoning District. PID: 25-102-022-0 and 25- 102-006-0. Director Rogness introduced the request to consider approving an ordinance amending Section 1102 of the Prior Lake City Code as Subsection 1102.1600, expansion of a nonconforming restaurant use related to outdoor music. The current restaurant and marina business is known as Charlie’s on Prior (previously referred to as the Shore Club and Marina). The proposed amendment relates to adding a new provision that would allow outdoor “Dinner Music” with certain restrictions. He explained the history, current circumstances, issues, financial impact, alternatives and recommended motion. He presented a draft Ordinance Amendment proposal by Charlie’s, draft Ordinance Amendment proposal by City Staff, Section 307, Outdoor Event Ordinance and information presented to the July 5 Planning Commission Meeting by Jeff Petschl. Commission Comments/Questions: Petersen said he attended the Wednesday July 13th meeting with Commissioner Kallberg and by himself on Thursday July 14th. He said Wednesday night was a dinner music night and stated this is where the controversy comes from because soon as they amplify the music it is considered an event. He said in fact it is two guys playing; one guy on the keyboard and the other on an acoustical guitar and on this night they did have some issues, but they were still amplified by their own speaker and the sound volume was checked while they were playing and they have the monometer set up about one hundred feet away and it was registering in the 60’s with or without them playing. He said the loudest thing out there was the wind that day. So by the monometer you could not hear the music over the wind, but that was not through the sound system. Typically, they would like to run through their sound system and he said the next night he did have the opportunity to hear the event there. He said that was a louder event and that is the type of event they want and is allowed by ordinance for them to have four. He stated they were a little louder, but he also had the opportunity to hear what the dinner music sounded like through their sound system, regular music was playing in between what the Cities 97 was doing. He commented on what level the noise was at one hundred feet away and explained where the sidewalk is with the handicap access ramp is you cannot hear the music at all. But when Cities 97 was there it was another windy day, so it was barely audible above the wind and the waves and the boats. He can see how this would be louder on a calm day though. On a windy day if you were six houses away, he is not sure how you would hear that at all. On a calm day, he can see how the music would carry and be a little louder. The dinner music style was not noticeable. He was able to go on the other side where the deck stops on the property line but assumed it was louder on other side as that is the way the speaker are pointing. He said most of the speakers in the place are directional speakers, so you could be standing next to one and couldn’t hear it much because if it is not pointed right at you, you cannot hear it. Kallberg stated unfortunately he did not hear the music on Wednesday as he needed to leave. He stated he is just not quite clear on dinner music versus music event. He would like to get that reinforced. 11 Jeff Petschl, (3856 Green Heights Trail SW). He stated he is a resident as well as the owner of Charlie’s on Prior at 3950 Green Heights Trail SW. He explained the dinner music versus music event. He had a handout for Commissioner Larson that was handed out last week, when Commissioner Larson was absent from the meeting. He thanked Commissioner Petersen for coming out two times and Commissioner Kallberg for coming out; however, apologized for the music not up and running as it should. He explained the differences in the ordinances and commented on the twenty days of live dinner music; they control the speakers/output. There is no difference that is being played seven days a week until 10pm. The difference on the four events are the live entertainment is on their speakers; however, the volume is still controlled by us. Kallberg said he was there on the 14th of July and with Cities 97 live music and sat ten feet in front of the speaker and still could talk with his wife. He went to the end of the deck and could not hear it at all. He said they drove past the site and could not hear anything. He does not find this objective at all. Petschl explained the time frame as well as the type of music they have there. Trying to compensate for some items such as parking or waiting for their customers. Petersen said from what he seen and heard; it seems like the way they have their speakers, being directional, and what he heard from his own ears he is in support of extending their dinner music events to twenty and keeping their permitted events to four. He stated in the ordinance if things do go arye and all of a sudden get different owners or decide to get a different cliental and start playing thrash metal the City Council does have the right to pull the ordinance and put a stop to it; it is not like we are locked into something. His recommendation would be to extend their dinner events to twenty; and another thing that he didn’t realize before this whole process is they get a lot of people on the weekends and these events are mainly during the week, so they are not during the weekend when neighbors are entertaining. Larson stated it is a little bit of a dilemma when they consider it an event because of the outdoor speakers and still having the control from the establishment. He said seeing that the hours are 3pm to 9pm; these hours are not cutting into sleeping habits and such. He said he appreciates the establishment working with events and parking. He agrees with Commissioner Kallberg on outdoor events compared to outdoor music considerations. Having an outside vender such as Cities 97 event to be considered along the lines for the other music events here in town. He said seeing the outdoor dinner music to categorize that as an event, he has difficulty with that, especially when they can control the volume. He said he doesn’t consider the dinner music an event. He stated he agrees with the comments about events versus outdoor dining hour music would be and the dilemma on that. Kallberg stated he appreciates Mr. Petschl’s email that came late attached regarding the background noise from the wind and the overhead aircraft often exceeded the controlled limit that they impose on all of their music. He would support the twenty and four combination as opposed to the originally asked of twenty and eight and the Cities counter was twenty and four seems fine with him. Fleming he echoes Commissioners Kallbergs appreciation to Charlie’s for inviting us out and really doing a thorough job of making sure all of the concerns were heard. He believes that Charlie’s has been an exceptional neighbor; listening to complaints as they come to you and taking all the efforts that you have made in the past and continue to make so that Charlie’s remains one of the bright stars in Prior Lake in an example of conceding and planning and sustaining a viable business today in Prior Lake. He will be supporting the recommendation with the twenty/four combination of events. MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECONDED BY KALLBERG TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 1102 OF THE PRIOR LAKE CITY CODE AS SUBSECTION 1102.1600 AT 8:22 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Larson, Petersen and Kallberg. Tieman Absent. The Motion carried. B. Comprehensive Plan Discussion No Comprehensive Plan Discussion tonight. 6. New Business: None. 12 7. Announcements / City Council Updates: None. 8. Adjournment: MOTION BY FLEMING, SECONDED BY PETERSEN TO ADJORN THE MONDAY, JULY 18, 2016 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AT 8:23 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Larson, Petersen and Kallberg. Tieman Absent. The Motion carried. Sandra Woods, Development Services Assistant