Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-06-22 PC MINilivater THE 1INTNYLACE OF MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 22, 2022 REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. Chairman Dybvig called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Chairman Dybvig, Commissioners Cox, Hoffman, Knippenberg, Steinwall, Swanson, Councilmember Odebrecht (via Zoom) Absent: None Staff: Community Development Director Gladhill, Assistant Planner Gutknecht APPROVAL OF MINUTES Possible approval of minutes of May 25, 2022 regular meeting Motion by Commissioner Hoffman, seconded by Commissioner Steinwall, to approve the minutes of the May 25, 2022 meeting. Motion passed 6-0-1 with Commissioner Swanson abstaining. OPEN FORUM There were no public comments. CONSENT AGENDA Case No. 2022-28, Resolution adopting Written Findings for Denial of a Variance to Exceed the Maximum Allowable Garage Area of 1,000 Square Feet at 7155 Melville Court North, Stillwater, Minnesota Case No. 2022-26, Variance to the allowed impervious surface coverage in order to construct a deck. Property located at 3490 87th St N in the TR district. Paul and Luane Bruggers, property owners. Case No. 2022-30, Variance to the sideyard setback for an addition/remodel. Property located at 1204 4th Ave S in the RB district. Katie Kangas, applicant and Michael and Nicole Willenbring, property owners. Motion by Commissioner Cox, seconded by Councilmember Odebrecht, to adopt the Consent Agenda. Motion passed 6-0-1 with Commissioner Swanson abstaining. UNFINISHED BUSINESS There was no unfinished business. PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. 2022-36: Consideration of a Variance for an addition. Property Located at 1792 Greeley St S in the BP -I District. Chris Hassis, Property owner. Assistant Planner Gutknecht explained that the property owner/applicant is requesting a Variance to the Sideyard (Interior) Setback in order to construct an 8,500 square foot addition to the west of the existing building, to create a space for body technicians and detail departments to increase efficiency; no new services are being added. The applicant is also requesting a deviation from the design standards required for the West Stillwater Business Planning Commission June 22, 2022 Park area for the 85' x 104' pole building type constructed building with "Pro -rib steel panel" walls and roof. The existing building, consistent with design standards, appears to be a combination of painted block work area with a styled front office with stone veneer and lap siding, but is currently nonconforming in regard to the side yard setback. The required sideyard setback for the addition is 20 feet. The owner is proposing a 3.7-foot setback, to match the existing building's nonconforming setback. Staff recommends that Planning Commission approve the requested 3.7-foot sideyard setback variance and deny the requested deviation to the required design standard for lack of practical difficulty being shown. Chris Hassis, owner of Hassis Paintworks, showed photos of neighbors' buildings which have the same siding as proposed. He stated he is willing to apply another siding material on the 15- foot portion of the new building that is exposed to the road. Tom, builder from Sunnyside Construction, showed a panel of an alternative material, adding that the cost of upgrading to a potentially conforming material would be $100,000 not considering potential engineering issues that may be caused by the additional weight. He stated that the building is hidden from the road. Councilmember Steinwall asked if there are options to match the existing building. Tom replied that using siding matching the current building would cost more than $1-2 million, a very big hardship. Community Development Director Gladhill stated that the panel shown would not comply with the minimal design guidelines in the West Business Park area. He will work with the applicant to find alternative solutions. Chair Dybvig opened the public hearing. A person identified as BP Gas (via Zoom) asked what is the nature of the expansion? Mr. Gutknecht replied it is to create more space for the existing business operation but not expansion. Chair Dybvig closed the public hearing. Commissioners Hoffman and Steinwall remarked that the setback variance is reasonable but the Commission cannot grant a variance to design standards for economic reasons. Motion by Commissioner Steinwall, seconded by Commissioner Cox, to approve Case No. 2022- 36, Variance to sideyard setback for an addition at 1792 Greeley St S, with the typical staff - recommended condition stating that any changes must come back to the Planning Commission for review. All in favor. Motion by Commissioner Steinwall, seconded by Commissioner Hoffman, to deny Case No. 2022- 36, Variance to West Stillwater Business Park District Design Standards for an addition at 1792 Greeley St S, based on the Planning Commission's inability to grant variances based on economic hardship. All in favor. Mr. Gladhill stated staff will contact the applicant about possible economic development tools. Case No. 2022-37: Consideration of a Variance for the construction of a deck. Property located at 424 Grove St S in the RA District. Ronald Cardinal and Stacy Franklin. property owners. Mr. Gladhill reviewed the case. Ronald Cardinal and Stacey Franklin are requesting a Variance to allow a deck within the corner side yard setback of 30 feet. The existing home is considered a lawful nonconforming use due to a deficient setback. The approximately 272 square foot Page 2 of 7 Planning Commission June 22, 2022 deck is proposed to be 15.5 feet from the side property line abutting Pine Street West. Staff finds the requested variance is not in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning code, is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, nor has practical difficulty been established. Therefore, staff recommends denial of the application. Commissioner Steinwall asked if there are alternatives to the design. Mr. Gladhill replied that the deck could be accessed from the exterior without the need for the 4' walkway, though it may not be convenient. Ron Cardinal, property owner, stated from the current wall to the property edge is 34' rather than 15.5', so the 4' walkway would still be 30' back and would be behind a green area, a sidewalk, and 13' of trees and bushes. Due to roof height, this is the only method of getting to the deck. Mr. Gladhill stated that a survey has not been provided but he is confident that the existing setback is 10-12' measured from aerial photos, or about 20' at most, and Mr. Cardinal disagreed. Chairman Dybvig opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Chair Dybvig closed the public hearing. Commissioner Steinwall suggested tabling the case to allow the applicant and the City time to determine the existing setback. Commissioner Cox pointed out that staff has also said the proposed variance would alter the essential character of the neighborhood which is a concern. Motion by Commissioner Cox, seconded by Commissioner Swanson, to deny Case No. 2022-37, Variance for the construction of a deck at 424 Grove St S. All in favor. Case No. 2022-38: Consideration of a re -subdivision. Property located at 805 Hickory St W in the RB district. Daved Najarian, property owner. Mr. Gutknecht stated that the applicant is requesting to split their lot into two lots. The existing residence is located on the east side of the lot and consists of a dwelling, detached garage, shed, and patio. The west portion of the lot is vacant. The proposal would split the existing 15,758 square foot parcel into an 8,059 square foot parcel (Parcel A) and a 7,699 square foot (Parcel B). Parcel A would contain the existing residence; a new single-family home is proposed for Parcel B. Staff recommends approval of the lot split with four conditions. Commissioner Steinwall asked if the 27% structural impervious surface coverage noted in the staff report for Parcel A would be after subdivision, and Mr. Gutknecht stated yes. Commissioner Cox asked if the planned removal of the hot tub and patio would get the property below the 25% maximum impervious surface coverage, and Mr. Gutknecht replied the impervious calculations on the survey did not include the hot tub or patio. Mr. Gladhill added that staff can work this out administratively so a lot coverage variance would not be required. Daved Najarian, property owner, said he is open to adjusting the amount of coverage. Chair Dybvig opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Chair Dybvig closed the public hearing. Page 3 of 7 Planning Commission June 22, 2022 Motion by Commissioner Cox, seconded by Commissioner Hoffman, to approve Case No. 2022-38, re -subdivision of property located at 805 Hickory St W in the RB district, with the four conditions recommended by staff, adding Condition #5 stating the applicant must meet the 25% impervious surface coverage on Parcel A. All in favor. Case No. 2022-41: Consideration of Preliminary Plat, Final Plat, Conditional Use Permit for new Retail Development at 2001 Washington St, Mikden of Stillwater, LLC, property owners. Mr. Gladhill stated that the City has received a series of applications in order to facilitate the infill development of two retail parcels along the south property line of 2001 Washington Ave. referred to as the former Herberger's Site. The process is complicated as a portion requires City Council approval while a portion can be approved by the Planning Commission. Given the split approval authority, the Planning Commission may want to refer all final actions to the City Council with recommendations. From an Economic Development Goal and Policy standpoint, staff supports the request. However, staff has potential concern about traffic safety and congestion internal to the site as well as the surrounding public roadway system, and has requested a traffic study from the applicant to better understand the impacts of this additional development on existing infrastructure. Staff would also recommend a traffic study to model future levels of service at both entrances along Washington Avenue as well as the intersection of Washington Avenue and West Frontage Road. Staff fully supports approval of Lot 2 (Caribou) as it complies with applicable Zoning Code Requirements. Staff desires additional feedback and direction from the Planning Commission before supporting Lot 3 (future development) as it relates to future improvements to West Frontage Road and Washington Avenue. Councilmember Odebrecht asked about the 60 day clock, and in regard to the PUD, what are Public Works Director Sanders' thoughts on solving what will be an obvious safety issue? Mr. Gladhill replied the 60 day clock will likely need to be extended. He said Public Works Director Sanders shared concerns about the intersection and avoiding a situation where the City must buy property in the future, but Mr. Sanders had stated it wouldn't be fair to hold up Caribou Cabin because there is not a plan yet. He said that Public Safety staff voiced concern about the interior traffic circulation and stacking, and their recommendation is that until there is an internal traffic study, they don't feel comfortable recommending approval. Commissioner Steinwall noted that the Commission must hold a public hearing on the PUD. Secondly this public hearing was noticed for both the preliminary plat and final plat and she didn't see any materials with respect to the final plat. She added that City ordinance and state statute requires review by MnDOT and the County. Mr. Gladhill answered that the project has been sent to MnDOT for review, including how it fits with the development occurring on the south side of Hwy 36 in Oak Park Heights. No County roads are involved so the County need not review. Commissioner Swanson asked when the frontage road will be improved. Mr. Gladhill replied is it not in the City's CIP at this point. When preparing the 2023 budget, staff will request some planning dollars for a transportation study for this intersection. Commissioner Cox asked, if some of the retention pond is taken away, is that a concern for impervious surface coverage? Mr. Gladhill replied it is absolutely a concern and staff has had a conversation with Brown's Creek Watershed District. Stormwater management is noted on the site plan for Caribou Cabin Page 4 of 7 Planning Commission June 22, 2022 and a future site. The future frontage road will require a reconfiguration of stormwater ponds, however the City can't hold up a project that meets all the zoning standards. Michael Givens, part of the ownership and management of Mikden of Stillwater, stated it has taken a year to get to this point and Caribou's patience is waning as the developers struggle to get answers on the future frontage road and MnDOT's intent with the corridor. One of the three lots proposed is laid out where the frontage road would run through, and Caribou Cabin has been positioned far enough off what could be a future intersection. With DiaSorin warehouse and Harbor Freight being the existing tenants, there is currently very little traffic on the site. There are 652 parking stalls on the site so it is over -parked currently. Commissioner Cox asked how current traffic would move into the Caribou Cabin area and out onto the street. Mr. Givens replied that most traffic will enter and exit the main entrance to the property which is the second entrance to the north. This will keep the drive -through stack off the front of the building. Mr. Gladhill added that the southern entrance onto Washington is currently shown as right -in, right -out. Public Safety staff recommends that it be ingress only; they don't want traffic to exit there and then U-turn. The plan is to have a continuous frontage road and not dead-end. Commissioner Steinwall asked if a parking calculation has been done assuming a more intensive use that might take place going forward. Mr. Gladhill replied that the site went from retail, which has the most intense parking requirements, to warehouse. If a more intense use came forward, a review would be required at that time. Staff recommends moving forward with Caribou Cabin and the site plan. The PUD for the second lot can be addressed when more is known about the frontage road and Washington Avenue. Mr. Givens added that the warehouse has a five year lease that began June 1, 2022, with two five year options to extend. It is difficult to provide a legitimate traffic study without knowing what the second user will be. Chair Dybvig opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. He closed the public hearing. Commissioner Swanson acknowledged it is a nice location for a retail improvement but a very tricky traffic situation. There is a median so there will be more controlled egress but he has concerns about U-turns. Commissioner Cox also voiced traffic concerns. She would favor moving forward with Caribou/Lot 2 and not addressing Lot 3 until there is a new business proposal for that space. Commissioner Steinwall said she understands the property owner has been working with Caribou for some time but the Commission is not in a position to grant a CUP for a drive - through without further info about traffic. Secondly, if Lot 3 is to be addressed later, then a new preliminary plat is needed because tonight's materials address three lots and an outlot. Third, final plat approval is premature without further info about internal traffic flow and impacts of this particular use of this corner. Councilmember Odebrecht suggested referring the case to the Council to get Public Works engaged and come together with a more cohesive concept. Page 5 of 7 Planning Commission June 22, 2022 Commissioner Steinwall disagreed, stating the Planning Commission has a duty to make recommendations to the Council. Mr. Givens noted that they plan on retaining all these lots long into the future. On the third outlot, they are only asking to create the lot at this point. Its future use would have to come back through the Commission and the Council at a later date. Mr. Gladhill recognized that it is not 100% certain that that reserved outlot provides sufficient right of way. In terms of the second lot for a future user, he said if the Commission grants plat approval, it is giving certain entitlement. His role is to help businesses and find solutions. Chair Dybvig pointed out the Commission is providing a recommendation on the plat, and making a decision on the CUP. Approval of the CUP for Lot 2 would allow them to have the drive -through and the Commission could add the strong statement that if future uses proposed for Lot 3 generate any traffic issues such as a drive -through, it would be more appropriate to do a traffic study at that point. Commissioner Steinwall said, given the number of issues in play, the Commission should wait for comments from MnDOT before sending the case on to the Council. Motion by Chair Dybvig, seconded by Commissioner Knippenberg, to recommend that the City Council approve Lot 2, and to raise concern about Lot 3 in that there doesn't appear to be a road or a street for an access point. Motion passed 6-1 with Commissioner Steinwall voting nay. Motion by Commissioner Steinwall, seconded by Councilmember Odebrecht, to table action on the CUP until the July Planning Commission meeting. Motion failed 2-5 with Commissioners Swanson, Hoffman, Knippenberg, Cox and Chair Dybvig voting nay. Motion by Commissioner Cox, seconded by Commissioner Hoffman to approve the CUP for a drive - through on Lot 2 contingent on the plat being approved. Motion passed 6-1 with Commissioner Steinwall voting nay. Case No. 2022-43: Interim Use Permit Ordinance. Mr. Gladhill explained that as the City evaluated long-term policy on outdoor uses such as outdoor seating/dining and outdoor events following two years of relaxed rules during the COVID-19 Pandemic, the City learned how these uses might be able to be expanded long-term and administered in a better way. The City Council has already addressed events and outdoor seating in public spaces. This ordinance focuses on events and outdoor seating on private property. Currently, outdoor seating/dining and outdoor events on private property is allowable as a Conditional Use in most areas of the City. Conditional Uses are allowable uses that require Planning Commission approval (not an administrative/staff approval); the Planning Commission can attach reasonable conditions to mitigate reasonable concerns. The struggle the City has had with this approach in the past is that once approved, the approval is perpetual with the land and does not expire unless there is a violation of the terms of the agreement. The approval transfers to future owners. Often the City finds a particular request reasonable at the time, but isn't comfortable with a perpetual approval. In response, the City Council directed staff to introduce a new tool known as an Interim Use Permit. This essentially functions as a Conditional Use Permit, but will expire. The expiration can be tied to a specific date or an event in time. Interim Uses are essentially authorized by Statute to address uses that may be acceptable under Zoning Code today, but may not be acceptable in the future. This draft ordinance also streamlines administration after initial approval. The initial Interim Use Permit Page 6 of 7 Planning Commission June 22, 2022 approval must be granted by the Planning Commission. From there, annual renewals may be processed administratively. Chair Dybvig noted that if the use is discontinued for three months, the IUP expires three months following the date that it is no longer in use. He questioned how this would work in light of outdoor dining which cannot take place in the winter. Mr. Gladhill replied staff can work with the City Attorney to craft language to cover wintertime breaks in use. Commissioner Steinwall suggested the ordinance be rewritten so it states that the interim use permit terminates on change of ownership. She also voiced concern about renewals. Mr. Gladhill explained the IUP is not like a license that must be renewed every year - it is intended to continue for a little longer by design. Chair Dybvig noted that, since violation of any condition set forth leads to revocation, if there are no problems with outdoor event, perhaps it should not require review every 10 years. If there is a lapse of a year, the use would have to come before the Commission as a new use. He also stated a public hearing should take place. Chair Dybvig opened the public hearing and there were no public comments, so he closed the public hearing. He recapped discussion, stating that the Commission is recommending the addition of a time limit, an expiration for non-use, expiration with a change in ownership, and that it could be by event versus by date. Motion by Commissioner Hoffman, seconded by Commissioner Steinwall, to recommend the City Council adopt an Interim Use Permit Ordinance, Case No. 2022-43, recommending those four items discussed above. All in favor. NEW BUSINESS There was no new business. DISCUSSION Chair Dybvig noted that the Commission will need to elect Vice Chair at the next meeting. FYI STAFF UPDATES There were no staff updates. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Knippenberg, seconded by Councilmember Odebrecht, to adjourn the meeting at 9:26 p.m. All in favor. ATTEST: John bvig, Chair Tim Gladhill, Community Development Director Page 7 of 7