Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-10-26 PC MINilivater THE 1I11TNYLACE OF MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 26, 2022 REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. Chairman Dybvig called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Chairman Dybvig, Commissioners Knippenberg, Steinwall, Swanson, Councilmember Odebrecht Absent: Commissioners Cox and Hoffman Staff: Assistant Planner Gutknecht, Planning Manager Robinson APPROVAL OF MINUTES Possible approval of minutes of September 28, 2022 regular meeting Motion by Commissioner Steinwall, seconded by Commissioner Swanson, to approve the minutes of the September 28, 2022 meeting. All in favor. OPEN FORUM There were no public comments. CONSENT AGENDA There were no items on the Consent Agenda. UNFINISHED BUSINESS There was no unfinished business. PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. 2022-64: Consider Request for a Conditional Use Permit for an Accessory Dwelling Unit and Variance for the construction of an Accessory dwelling unit at a reduced rearward setback at 919 5th Avenue South; Case of Noel and Terese Molloy Assistant City Planner Gutknecht reviewed the application. The applicant is seeking a Variance and Conditional Use Permit for an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) above a garage at a reduced rear yard setback. The Conditional Use Permit would facilitate the replacement of an existing 576 square foot, detached garage with an 800 square foot, detached garage with a second story 800 square foot ADU set back approximately 15 feet (25 feet required) from the rear lot line. While the Conditional Use Permit request for an ADU does not conform to all standards outlined in the RB - Two Family Zoning District, the request for the variance associated with the replacement of the existing garage is reasonable. However staff believes that the proposed design should be updated to reflect four-sided design. Staff notes that nearly every Conditional Use Permit related to an accessory dwelling unit has a variance associated with it. Staff has recommended amending the setback requirement through an overarching ordinance amendment for Accessory Buildings, which has been tabled for comments. Staff recommends approval of the Variance and Conditional Use Permit with nine conditions. Planning Commission October 26, 2022 Noel Molloy, applicant, said the garage would not function if it had to maintain the required 25 foot setback. Chairman 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 PC2022-07, Variance Request to Construct an Accessory Dwelling Unit with a Reduced Rear Yard Setback at 919 5th Avenue South, and to adopt Resolution PC2022-08, Conditional Use Permit Request to Construct an Accessory Dwelling Unit at 919 5th Avenue South, with the nine conditions recommended by staff. All in favor. Case No. 2022-70: Consider request for a Variance to facilitate the construction of an addition at the existing reduced exterior side yard setback of the existing dwelling at 704 5th Street North; Case of David and Kristen deLeon Assistant Planner Gutknecht reviewed the case. The applicants are seeking a sideyard setback Variance for construction of an approximately 420 square foot single -story addition at approximately 18.2 feet from the exterior (right-of-way) side lot line (20 feet required). Currently, the existing single-family dwelling is set back 18.2 feet, making it legal non- conforming and deficient by approximately 1.8 feet. The proposed addition would extend the existing non -conforming 18.2-foot front yard setback another 14 feet to the north. While the variance appears reasonable, not based on economic considerations, and if designed compliantly with the required design guidelines would likely improve the property and continue to complement the neighborhood, these alone are not grounds to approve a variance. While the existing conditions are not created by the current property owners, options are available to build the addition without a variance. Staff requests that the Planning Commission provide policy direction to assist in the determination. Kristen deLeon, applicant, said they are looking to make their house a bit bigger and it makes more sense to match the existing setback rather than a jog in. Moving the wall in 2 feet to conform with the 20 foot setback would leave no room to walk around the bed. Chair Dybvig opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Chair Dybvig closed the public hearing. Motion by Commissioner Steinwall, seconded by Commissioner Swanson, to adopt Resolution PC2022-09, Variance Request to Decrease the Exterior Sideyard Setback to Facilitate Construction of an Addition at 704 5th Street North, with the five conditions recommended by staff. Councilmember Odebrecht noted there is an opportunity to start thinking about similar cases in the same way to achieve similar results. Ms. Robinson added that, because of Stillwater's unique history and topography, there are a lot of legal non -conforming lots and structures. The challenge is balancing requirements, environment, and high quality design. All in favor. NEW BUSINESS There was no new business. DISCUSSION Page 2 of 5 Planning Commission October 26, 2022 Case No. CD 2022-73: CONCEPT REVIEW for Request for Variance at 1824 1st Street North; Case of Ryan and Angela Rambacher Ms. Robinson explained that concept reviews do not require action but give an opportunity for non -binding feedback and policy direction. She stated that the City has been working with the property owners regarding the proposed construction of a new dwelling. The property is legal non -conforming and deficient in lot width and overall size. It previously had a legal non- conforming single-family home which was removed due to fire. There are multiple, unique physical characteristics that make compliance with the strict interpretation of the guidelines challenging: it is partway up the valley bluff, making building height measurements challenging; its width and size is lawful, non -conforming; 1st Street North (the desired front facade) is not an improved City street (even though it is public right-of-way). The Heritage Preservation Commission was understanding of the need for a Variance to obtain a reasonably designed dwelling but had concern about the requested height Variance and requested that the owner look for ways to reduce the proposed three story structure to 2.5 stories to comply with City Code. Staff believes some degree of sideyard setback Variance is reasonable. The HPC and Planning Commission must determine the minimum Variance necessary in order to achieve a reasonable use. Strict interpretation of the Zoning Code would only accommodate a 20-foot- wide home. Ryan Rambacher, applicant, said their goals are to have an energy efficient home with a small footprint. The topography covers up the tuck -under garage level halfway back making it appear to be a two story structure. Commissioner Steinwall said the applicant will need to provide more information to demonstrate why the unique characteristics of the lot justify a variance. Councilmember Odebrecht said he views height and stories differently. The spirit of the code is to protect the view of the river from the bluff. If the applicant can stick to the 35' height limit, he would support the proposal. Commissioner Swanson acknowledged that the topography of lot is challenging and seems to make a tuck -under garage most logical, however that doesn't necessarily justify exceeding the height restriction. Commissioner Knippenberg noted the proposal is three stories but still 35 feet so on that basis she would support the request. Chair Dybvig said his biggest issue is defining the front on 1st Street. He asked how height would be measured if the front were on Willow, which slopes. Ms. Robinson read from the zoning code, which defines height as the vertical dimension measured from the average elevation of the finished lot grade of the front of the building to the highest point of the ceiling of the top story. She agreed that the ultimate determination of height will depend on where the front is. Staff will follow up with the applicant and help them move forward with the process. Case No. CD 2022-74: CONCEPT REVIEW for Request for Variance at 905 Hickory St W; Case of Daved Najarian Ms. Robinson reviewed the case. The owner recently received approval from the Planning Commission for a lot split to facilitate a new dwelling. The scale and massing appear appropriate for the surrounding neighborhood. The proposal is deficient in the required front setback, which requires the garage to be set back at least 10 feet from the front of the home. Page 3 of 5 Planning Commission October 26, 2022 While the applicant has made efforts to add design elements to de-emphasize the attached garage, the front facade is dominated by the garage. The HPC reviewed the proposal in concept on October 19, 2022 and supported the deviation to the garage orientation due to the unique `rhythm of streetscape' but requested minor modifications to emphasize the front entrance and de-emphasize the attached garage. Staff agrees, and recommends that the applicant modify the plan to recess the attached tuck -under garage and call more attention to the main (front) entrance. Daved Najarian, 905 Hickory Street, applicant, pointed out there is a hodgepodge of homes along the street and many are garage -forward. The further the home or garage is pushed back, the more the front of the home needs to be raised up, which could cause drainage issues. Chair Dybvig noted the grade is not great, so he is struggling to identify a practical difficulty as it is a fairly standard lot. Mr. Najarian stated that they explored the idea of a detached garage but got into impervious surface restrictions. He also feels that the front facing attached garage reduces the impact of the view for neighbors. Commissioner Steinwall said she would like to hear more explanation of what the practical difficulties are with this vacant lot. Mr. Najarian asked how precedents of other homes with garages on the front are considered. Ms. Robinson responded there are many conditions that may have lead to nearby homes having a front facing garage so the applicant shouldn't focus too much on precedent, but it is worth looking into how other lots that have similar conditions have achieved certain outcomes. Commissioner Steinwall noted that variances are considered on a case by case basis. She suggested that the applicant clarify what is so unique about this lot and the conditions in this neighborhood that justify the variance. Discuss Potential Updates to Regulations Pertaining to Mobile Food Units Ms. Robinson informed the Commission that the HPC is undertaking some possible changes to the regulations pertaining to mobile food units. More information will be available in the coming months. Impervious Surface Review for Identification of Potential Variance Requests Mr. Gutknecht stated that in response to an increase in impervious coverage related variance requests, staff has reviewed the conditions in two recently approved and constructed subdivisions, to get an idea of how many lots in certain areas may apply for a variance in the future. Staff concludes that some developments were not heavily scrutinized in regards to impervious surface during both the platting and the construction phases which may result in returning variance requests for similar scenarios. Staff has not identified a broad policy remedy that would correct this, and welcomes feedback from the Commission. This will continue to be viewed on a case by case basis. Staff has already implemented updated plan review procedures to catch these situations at the building permit level. Commissioner Steinwall suggested consulting the City Attorney because she sees this as a developer -caused issue of maximizing building footprints, building floating doors to nowhere, and putting the Planning Commission in the position of responding to homeowners who just want a deck so they can use that door. She asked if there is a way to hold developers Page 4 of 5 Planning Commission October 26, 2022 responsible through developer's agreement or the required bond to make sure that floating doors aren't part of the construction. Or the City could consider reforming some of the ordinances to require additional set -asides so the impervious surface of the development in its totality is considered. Ms. Robinson said staff can follow up with the City Attorney but still will have to look at these situations on a case by case basis going forward. Mr. Gutknecht added that staff is now scrutinizing not only new homes and new subdivisions but all homes for this issue when looking at building plans. Councilmember Odebrecht said builders and also the City made some mistakes. He would be comfortable handling such requests, assuming no other challenges, on the Consent Agenda if it makes staff jobs easier. Commissioner Steinwall pointed out variance requests require a public hearing. Ms. Robinson said staff will follow up and discuss the ideas proposed here tonight. FYI STAFF UPDATES Ms. Robinson said she sent out a poll requesting availability for meeting dates in November and December. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Knippenberg, seconded by Commissioner Steinwall, to adjourn the meeting at 8:32 p.m. All in favor. Dybvig, Chair ATT ST: Tim ladhill, Community Development Director Resolution PC2022-07, Variance Request to Construct an Accessory Dwelling Unit with a Reduced Rear Yard Setback at 919 5th Avenue South Resolution PC2022-08, Conditional Use Permit Request to Construct an Accessory Dwelling Unit at 919 5th Avenue South Resolution PC2022-09, Variance Request to Decrease the Exterior Sideyard Setback to Facilitate Construction of an Addition at 704 5th Street North Page 5 of 5