Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-09-28 PC MIN PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES September 28, 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 Absent: None Staff: Community Development Director Gladhill, Assistant Planner Gutknecht, Planning Manager Robinson APPROVAL OF MINUTES Possible approval of minutes of August 24, 2022 regular meeting Motion by Commissioner Hoffman, seconded by Commissioner Knippenberg, to approve the minutes of the August 24, 2022 meeting. All in favor. OPEN FORUM There were no public comments. CONSENT AGENDA Case No. 2022-41: Consider Final Plat for MJG ADDITION (Caribou Coffee, 2001 Washington Ave W); Case of Mikden of Stillwater Motion by Commissioner Steinwall, seconded by Commissioner Cox, to adopt the Consent Agenda. All in favor. UNFINISHED BUSINESS There was no unfinished business. PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. 2022-19: Consider Request for Conditional Use Permit for Myrtle Apartments at 107 3rd St N; Case of Landucci Homes Community Development Director Gladhill reviewed the application. Landucci Homes is seeking a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to construct a 21-unit apartment building located at 107 Third Street North. He reminded the Commission this is not a City-proposed project. In 2018, the City approved a nine-unit residential building that was never constructed. In 2021, Landucci Homes proposed a 42-unit apartment building (revised to 39 units) that was ultimately denied by the City. The applicant has again revised the plans in light of the Planning Commission’s denial of multiple variances at the August 24, 2022 meeting. The Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) approved the revised building design at the September 21, 2022 meeting. Because it meets the minimum requirements of the zoning code, the City is obligated to approve the project. The developer has provided a revised traffic study based on the new site plan. Though traffic modeling indicates there will a slight increase in traffic Planning Commission September 28, 2022 Page 2 of 7 accidents as a result of the project, the traffic study found that the intersection of Myrtle Street and 3rd Street will operate at acceptable levels of service per accepted traffic engineering standards. The Downtown Parking Commission (DTPC) reviewed the proposed parking plan at their August 18, 2022 meeting. Though the project would ordinarily be 13 stalls deficient in parking requirements, the DTPC acknowledged that the City entered into a legally binding contract circa 2008 (reassigned circa 2017). Based on the underground parking configuration, the site would ordinarily be able to accommodate parking for 14 units. However, given the existence of a legally binding agreement/parking credit of 40 parking stalls, the DTPC recommended approval of the parking plan. The DTPC also recommended that the City terminate the remaining parking credits not needed for this project as a condition of approval (recommendation under review by the City Attorney). It appears that the developer has found a solution that maintains the same number of units (21) while achieving compliance with applicable dimensional standards in the Zoning Code. Commissioner Steinwall disagreed with the conclusion that the Commission has no obligation other than to confirm staff’s conclusion that it conforms with all zoning codes. She recalled past projects in which the Planning Commission has proposed conditions of approval for the CUP. Mr. Gladhill confirmed it is appropriate to attach reasonable conditions to a recommendation for approval. Councilmember Odebrecht asked where the project stands on the 60-day clock, and Mr. Gladhill replied that this is a new application which is about halfway through the 60-day clock. Councilmember Odebrecht asked if there been any conversation with Public Works regarding any recommended condition regarding traffic. Mr. Gladhill answered that all development projects like this go through a robust review with City staff. Public Safety, Public Works, the Building Official and other staff reviewed traffic issues and found the proposal acceptable. Staff looked at different ways to do right-in, right- out, however they would interfere with fire code. The developer may sign and paint, but cannot put in curbing that would prevent reasonable access with City fire equipment. Mr. Gladhill stated he believes the Public Works Director finds the proposal generally acceptable. Nathan Landucci, applicant, said he feels the building fits the lot and meets all setbacks and parking requirements. He is totally flexible on the in and out traffic pattern with whatever the City recommends. Councilmember Odebrecht said he appreciates the developer’s tenacity and willingness to work with City commissions and staff to get the project to scale. Chairman Dybvig opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Chairman Dybvig closed the public hearing. Commissioner Steinwall noted the developer’s willingness to bring the building into compliance with City Code. She suggested considering some of the same conditions that were attached to the 200 Chestnut project, for consistency. She would like to discuss traffic concerns. She noted there are proposed conditions about refuse being kept inside, about mechanical units, about keeping abutting sidewalks clean, a condition that all the inside parking places be assigned to tenants, a maintenance agreement for the installation of pedestrian scaled lighting on public sidewalks. She noted the Commission hasn’t discussed Planning Commission September 28, 2022 Page 3 of 7 stormwater requirements or whether a stormwater plan needs to be reviewed by the watershed district. Chairman Dybvig called for a motion prior to more discussion. Motion by Commissioner Steinwall, seconded by Chairman Dybvig, to recommend approval of Case No. 2022-19, Conditional Use Permit for Myrtle Street Apartments at 107 3rd St N, and in addition to the staff-recommended conditions in the staff report, adding conditions similar to the ones the Commission recommended for the 200 Chestnut project (Conditions #4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13), and also add a condition about establishing a right-in right-out for the parking garage. Councilmember Odebrecht said he would like to have the Public Works team design what they would like to have in that space (parking garage entrance). Mr. Gladhill suggested a Condition could state right-in right-out or a reasonable traffic control as recommended by the City Engineer, as a friendly amendment. Commissioner Steinwall listed suggested Conditions 4 - refuse; 5 - screening mechanical units; 6 - keeping sidewalks clean; 7 - assigning the 26 on-site parking stalls to tenants; 9 - modifying this condition to require the right-in right-out or other reasonable conditions subject to approval by the City Engineer; 10 - maintenance agreement for pedestrian scaled lighting along the sidewalks. Mr. Gladhill said staff is looking at different ways to address pedestrian lighting, and Commissioner Steinwall suggested wording the Condition to state that if pedestrian scaled lighting is deemed necessary for public health and safety along the sidewalks then the developer should be responsible for maintaining it. She then continued reviewing the proposed conditions, questioning if there is a need to state in the development agreement that the developer is responsible for stormwater handling costs. Mr. Gladhill responded if the watershed district attaches conditions, they would be part of the developer agreement. A condition could say it must comply with the Middle St. Croix Watershed management permit. The developer would have to comply whether this is stated in a condition or not. Commissioner Steinwall said she would support combining Conditions 11, 12 and 13. Conditions 14 and 15 are the standard conditions set forth in the staff report. Motion passed 6-0-1 with Councilmember Odebrecht abstaining. Case No. 2022-63: Consider Request for a variance for the reconstruction and expansion of an attached garage at an existing reduced front yard setback at 603 Broadway St. S; Case of Todd and Anne Anderson Assistant Planner Gutknecht reviewed the case. The applicant, Imprint Architecture and Design (Jeremy Imhoff) and property owners, Todd and Anne Anderson are seeking a variance to expand an existing legal non-conforming structure to facilitate the reconstruction and expansion of an existing legal non-conforming attached garage. The existing attached garage is approximately 560 square feet and set back 27 feet from the right of way and 8.1 feet from the side yard property line. It is located 2 feet in front of the primary dwelling, but several feet behind the front porch. The proposed action seeks to allow the replacement of the existing 560 square foot attached garage with an expanded 783 square foot attached garage. The proposed expansion of the attached garage will maintain the nonconforming 27-foot front yard setback Planning Commission September 28, 2022 Page 4 of 7 and decrease the side yard setback to 5 feet. The HPC supports the design. Staff recommends approval with two conditions. Councilmember Odebrecht questioned one of the practical difficulties, as stated in the staff report that the existing owner did not construct the dwelling which was built in 1870. He struggles with this justification as a hardship, as the owner purchased the property knowing its configuration. Mr. Gladhill noted that the garage is already lawful non-conforming so the proposal tries to simply maintain that. The front of the garage is not going any closer to the street and staff feels that what is being put in its place is a much better design. There are several other physical conditions of the property that justify the hardship. Jeremy Imhoff, architect representing the applicant, said the biggest issue is there is an existing mudroom behind the first stall. If they build that front wall back, it reduces the floor plan below the standard stall length, making one stall unusable. The clients want to rebuild the garage to make it more useable and fit better with the historic house. Chair Dybvig opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Chair Dybvig closed the public hearing. Commissioner Steinwall stated normally she would not support increasing the legal non- conformity, but this proposal will not increase the nonconformity itself (the front yard setback) but is before the Commission because reconstruction will result in a bigger building that is non-conforming. Commissioner Cox remarked considering it’s already at 27 feet and it will improve the property and match the neighborhood better, allowing them to maintain the 27-foot setback seems reasonable. Chairman Dybvig commented he struggles with supporting the request. If it were set back 30 feet, there would still be 18 feet inside the garage, even enough space for a Lincoln Navigator (17’6”). The other stall could still be 22 feet. At the same time, he is sympathetic to the fact that it’s already there, and the project is not changing the look of the neighborhood much. Motion by Commissioner Cox, seconded by Commissioner Hoffman, to adopt Resolution 2022- _____, Variance Request to Expand a Legal Nonconforming Structure to Facilitate Construction of an Attached Garage at 603 Broadway Street South. Motion passed 5-2 with Commissioner Steinwall and Councilmember Odebrecht voting nay. Case No. 2022-64: Consider Request for a Conditional Use Permit for an Accessory Dwelling Unit and consideration of a Variance request for the construction of an Accessory dwelling unit at a reduced rear yard setback at 919 5th Ave S; Case of Noel Molloy. Item moved to the October 26th agenda. Chair Dybvig stated the applicant has requested postponement. Motion by Commissioner Cox, seconded by Commissioner Hoffman, to postpone Case No. 2022- 64, Conditional Use Permit for an Accessory Dwelling Unit and Variance request for the construction of an Accessory dwelling unit at a reduced rear yard setback at 919 5th Ave S, to the October 26 agenda. All in favor. Case No. 2022-65: Consider Request for a variance to increase the allowable amount of impervious surface to allow the construction a two-car garage at 1218 6th Ave. S; Case of Doug Hinderaker. Planning Commission September 28, 2022 Page 5 of 7 Planning Manager Robinson explained that the applicants, Doug and Lueann Hinderaker are seeking a variance to increase the amount of impervious surface allowed, to construct a 660 square foot, detached, two-car garage. The 6,715 square foot lot has a two-story, 1,942 square foot single-family house built in 1870. The proposed garage addition would increase the lot coverage for buildings to approximately 32% (2,192 square feet), an increase of about 9% (approximately 513 square feet), exceeding the 25% threshold. Staff recommends approval with two conditions. Commissioner Cox asked if there has been input from the Watershed District, and Mr. Gladhill replied this is in the Middle St. Croix Watershed. Often the “magic number” for the watershed district is 35%. Chair Dybvig opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Chairman Dybvig closed the public hearing. Motion by Commissioner Steinwall, seconded by Commissioner Knippenberg, to adopt Resolution 2022-___, Variance Request to Increase the Amount of Impervious Surface to Facilitate Construction of a Garage at 1218 Sixth Avenue South. Commissioner Cox suggested requiring the property owners to work with the watershed district to make sure the 9% excess impervious surface coverage is mitigated somehow. Chairman Dybvig suggested adding a condition requiring the property owners to comply with recommendations made by the Middle St. Croix Watershed District to mitigate additional impervious surface added to the property. This was accepted as a friendly amendment. All in favor. Case No. 2022-67: Consider Request for a variance to increase the allowable amount of impervious surface to construct a deck 3625 Summit Ln; Case of Dan Larson. Assistant City Planner Gutknecht stated that the applicant, Dan Larson, is seeking a variance to increase the amount of impervious surface allowed, to construct a 256 square foot deck. The site is 8,472 square feet and contains a two-story, 1,898 square foot single-family house built in 2019. The addition of the deck would increase the lot coverage for buildings from 23% to approximately 26% (2,234 square feet), an increase of approximately 3%. Because the impervious surface coverage requested exceeds the 25% threshold regulated by City Code, a variance is required. Staff recommends approval with three conditions. He explained Karen Kill with Brown’s Creek Watershed District confirmed that the Watershed District allows lots in this subdivision to have 31% total impervious surface coverage. The total percentage in this case will be 36% considering structure and other coverage. He said that Ms. Kill provided information about mitigation techniques which was passed along to the applicants. Chair Dybvig opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Chair Dybvig closed the public hearing. Motion by Commissioner Hoffman, seconded by Commissioner Swanson, to adopt Resolution 2022-___, Variance Request to Increase the Amount of Impervious Surface Coverage to Facilitate the Construction of a Deck at 3625 Summit Lane. Commissioner Cox requested an amendment to the motion (Resolution) to require the property owners to reduce the percentage of impervious surface coverage to 25% and this was acceptable to the Commission. All in favor. Planning Commission September 28, 2022 Page 6 of 7 Case No. 2022-57: Ordinance Amending Accessory Structure Regulations (sizes for larger lots, home offices/recreation rooms, remove conflicting language). Sec 31 304 Sec 31 306 Sec 31 308 Sec 31 314. Mr. Gladhill explained that the Planning Commission has been discussing several amendments to the City’s Accessory Structure Regulations. Earlier in 2022, the City Council reviewed the recommendations of the Planning Commission and generally concurred. He reviewed highlights of proposed policy changes. The amendment cleans up policy language regarding large accessory structures on large residential lots, language about allowing home offices on second levels of garages, and about membrane structures being allowed only on a temporary basis. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the ordinance amendment. Commissioner Steinwall asked for clarification on the definitions of the term’s accessory structure, accessory building, garage, and Mr. Gladhill replied perhaps the definitions could be further clarified. Chair Dybvig opened the public hearing. There were no public comments and he closed the public hearing. Chairman Dybvig asked if there is a way to ensure that accessory buildings are smaller than the house to which they are an accessory. Mr. Gladhill answered that standard was already there and would remain unchanged and staff will cross reference to make sure it’s included in each district. Sometimes there are conflicts between regulations in the underlying district and the performance standards for accessory structures. Consistency is needed. Language can be changed to be very clear about attached versus detached accessory buildings or structures, limiting detached structures to 20 feet tall. Motion by Chair Dybvig, seconded by Commissioner Steinwall, to table Case No. 2022-57, Ordinance Amending Accessory Structure Regulations (sizes for larger lots, home offices/recreation rooms, remove conflicting language), Sec 31 304 Sec 31 306 Sec 31 308 Sec 31 314, to October 26. Motion passed 6-0-1 with Councilmember Odebrecht abstaining. NEW BUSINESS There was no new business. DISCUSSION There were no discussion items. FYI STAFF UPDATES Format Changes for Planning Project Approvals (Variances, Conditional Use Permits, Interim Use Permits, etc.). Mr. Gladhill stated that staff has been working with the City Attorney and City Clerk to improve processes and document execution/recording. Many of the approvals and denials directly granted by the Planning Commission will now come forward in the form of a Resolution. This not only better documents findings to support actions along with conditions of approval, the format is more appropriate for recording the document against the property’s title. The Planning Commission will now be able to see the exact document format as part of the packet, as opposed to staff administratively approving a new document after Planning Commission action. This format is very common with other peer communities. Planning Commission September 28, 2022 Page 7 of 7 ADJOURNMENT Motion by Councilmember Odebrecht, seconded by Commissioner Hoffman, to adjourn the meeting at 8:44 p.m. All in favor. John Dybvig, Chair ATTEST: Tim Gladhill, Community Development Director Resolution 2022-___, Variance Request to Expand a Legal Nonconforming Structure to Facilitate Construction of an Attached Garage at 603 Broadway Street South Resolution 2022-___, Variance Request to Increase the Amount of Impervious Surface to Facilitate Construction of a Garage at 1218 Sixth Avenue South Resolution 2022-___, Variance Request to Increase the Amount of Impervious Surface Coverage to Facilitate the Construction of a Deck at 3625 Summit Lane