Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-134 . , . . . . RESOLUTION NO. 96-134 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER WITH REGARD TO AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A HOUSING PROJECT AT 304 SOUTH SECOND STREET IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted by the City Council upon notice to the public to hear the appeal of Harold D. Kimmel concerning the decision of the Planning Commission that was made on April 8, 1996; and, WHEREAS, written documentation was submitted by the City Staff by persons objecting to the variance by the property owners and testimony was taken at a hearing that was held de novo; and, WHEREAS, the Council made part of the record the entire file with regard to the matter under consideration and all staff reports and other submittal information previously submitted as part of the Planning Commission review. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, AS FOLLOWS: 1. That the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order attached to this Resolution as Exhibit" A" be and the same hereby are adopted as the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order sustaining the prior approval of the Planning Commission and denying the appeal presented by Harold D. Kimmel. Enacted by the City Council of the City of Stillwater this 21st day of May, 1996. ATTEST: J~ t -' lLOdv., Morli eldon, City Clerk " . . . CITY OF STILL WATER WASHINGTON COUNTY CITY COUNCIL ZONING APPEAL InRe: Appeal of the Planning Commission Approval of a Special Use Permit and Variance for Construction of a Housing Project at 304 South Second Street in the Central Business District FINDINGS OF FACT. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER On May 7, 1996, a Public Hearing was conducted by the City Council, upon Notice to the public, to hear the appeal of Harold D. Kimmel concerning a decision of the Planning Commission. The decision appealed from was made by the Planning Commission on April 8, 1996, and involved the granting of a variance and special use permit for a proposal for the construction of a residential housing project. The special use permit was required because, pursuant to the City Zoning Ordinance, a special use permit is required for residential uses in the central business district. Further, a 20 foot variance to the height restrictions of the zoning district is required, which allows for 50 foot high structures and a 70 foot structure was proposed. The Planning Commission approved both the special use permit and the variance. Thereafter, on April 16, 1996, within the time provided by law, Harold D. Kimmel filed an appeal under the provisions of the City Zoning Ordinance, requesting that the Planning Commission's decision be overturned. Thereafter, after due notice, as required by law, the City Council conducted a public hearing. At the hearing, which was held de novo, the City Council considered evidence and listened to persons who spoke in favor of and in opposition to the appeal. Based upon the evidence presented at the hearing, the City Council of the City of Stillwater does here make the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order: 1 . . . 1. FINDINGS OF FACT This appeal is properly before the City Council pursuant to provisions of the Stillwater City Code. 2. That the real estate that is the subject matter of this appeal contains approximately 63,485 square feet and is legally described as part of Lot 6, Block 35, of the original Town now City of Stillwater. Since February 12, 1996, the property has been owned by the City of Stillwater, acquired pursuant to an Agreement for the exchange of real property and municipal industrial development made between the City and Lanoga Corporation, a Delaware corporation, 125 West Fifth Street, Winona, Minnesota 55987-5550 and Northern States Power Company, 414 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, Minnesota 5540 1. 3. That prior to the acquisition of the property by the City, it was found that part of the site contained hazardous wastes. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) completed for the property indicated that the property was formerly occupied by the Stillwater Gas and Electric Company from approximately 1887 to 1910, at which time it was purchased by Bluff City Lumber and Consumers Light and Power Company. Northern States Power Company purchased the site in approximately 1924 and it was later acquired by Lanoga Corporation in 1972. While occupied by Stillwater Gas and Electric Light Company, predecessors to Northern States Power Company, this site was used as a coal gasication plant. When the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment revealed contamination, A TEC Associates, Inc. was hired by the City of Stillwater and completed a Phase II Environment Site Assessment at the site and found polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in the soil and ground water samples collected. Napholean, fluoranthene and benzine concentrations were detected in a down graded radiant monitoring welded exceeded the Minnesota Department of Health recommended allowable limits. The Minnesota Pollution Control agency thereafter designated the site as Gas Manufacturing Site No.1. Further, the 2 '. . . . United States Environmental Protection Agency completed a preliminary assessment and a site inspection report and the property was scored on the federal hazard ranking system. 4. Before acquisition by the City and in contemplation of its acquisition by the City, the site was enrolled in the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Voluntary Investigation and Clean Up program and a second addendum to Phase II Remedial Investigation Work Plan for the Former Manufacturing Gas Plan dated March 9, 1995, was accepted by the Pollution Control Agency for enrollment in a site remediation program that is ongoing. 5. That the applicants for the special use permit and variance had standing to request the special use permit and the variance in view of their proposal to purchase the property from the City of Stillwater for approximately $600,000.00, subject to the ongoing remediation program undertaken by Northern States Power Company and approved by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, provided that the applicants could be granted the variance and the special use permit necessary for the construction of their proposed project. 6. The property is located at the foot of a steep hill. Surrounding the site to the south is the SuperValu owned parking lot provided for the Cub headquarters building at an elevation of 807 feet. To the west is the right-of-way of Third Street. The Third Street elevation adjacent to the property is 790 feet near the driveway to the Cub parking lot entrance and on the low side it is 760 feet near the intersection with Olive Street. To the east of the site is the former UBC retail store and Grand Garage parking lot and the Gordon and Iron Metal Works is located to the southeast. 7. The site is vacant, having had the sheds housing the former lumber yard torn off the property . 8. The property contains monitoring wells necessary for the ongoing remediation being conducted by Northern States Power. 3 . . . 9. That the Comprehensive Plan of the City found that existing vacant sites in the downtown portion of the City were appropriate locations of infill housing and the Plan identifies the property as a location appropriate for infill multi-family housing. 10. The livable communities program of the Metropolitan Council also sets a goal for the City to provide adequate attached housing and this property is one of few sites in the City that could accommodate multi-family housing. 11. The site is serviced by City water, sewer and storm sewer and a major sanitary sewer line runs through the site. Water service is available from Third Street. 12. That the applicants have indicated a willingness to work with the City Engineer to minimize storm sewer run-off and to work with the Fire Chief to meet fire and building code requirements. 13. The traffic engineer for the City reviewed the project plans that provides two parking spaces for each guest unit and concluded that the system has adequate capacity to accommodate trips generated to the project. 14. The Heritage Preservation Commission reviewed the project at its meetings on February 5, March 8 and April 1, 1996, and at its April 1st meeting, the Heritage Preservation Commission approved the project with conditions of approval regarding signage, lighting, landscaping materials, color and roof treatment. 15. That the Heritage Preservation Commission determined that the development concept followed the design guidelines developed for the site for pedestrian orientation, set back proportion and height, materials and finish. 16. The Heritage Preservation Commission concluded that the desi~n, materials and color selection could further break-up and reduce the appearance of the development. 4 " . . I I Ie 17. That a residential use is compatible with the neighborhood since other uses along Third Street are residential and both the Downtown Plan and the Comprehensive Plan indicates the appropriateness of the site for residential use. 18. That the site is unique in view of the slope of the site which contains elevation changes of at least 30 feet, is set back from adjacent structures and the street and the side and rear yards are next to steeply sloped, treed lands. 19. That the additional height of 20 feet requested by the applicants was proposed by the designed review suggestions of the Heritage Preservation Committee so that the side of the proposed building facing Second Street on the East would be approximately the same height as adjacent structures and the units displaced by lower building on the front would be added to the west elevation of the proposed building in a way that would fit along the steep slopes but yet allow only one story elevation above the right-of-way of Third Street on the east. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW SPECIAL USE PERMIT 1. That the proposed housing project as proposed conforms to the requirements and the intent of the central business district zoning regulations, the Stillwater Downtown Plan and the City of Stillwater Comprehensive Plan. 2. That the conditions of approval that have been made a part of the approval by the Planning Commission to protect the neighborhood and the public and ensure conformity to the City Park Dedication Policy, the Parking Policy and the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. That the project will not be injurious to the neighborhood nor will it constitute a nuisance nor will it be detrimental to the neighborhood or the public welfare of the community. 5 " e . . VARIANCE 1. The typography of the site and the conditions unique to the site, the steeply sloped areas of the site, the vegetative conditions of the site, the hazardous wastes being remediated from the site and the need for ongoing access for monitoring wells create a hardship for the development of the site. 2. That the unique characteristics of the site are a hardship that is not created by the applicant and constitute a hardship within the meaning of Minnesota Statute ~462.357, Subd. 6(2). 3. That the granting of a variance would not alter the existential character of the locality. 4. That the granting of a height variance will permit relief from the strict application of the height limitations in the code and prevent or mitigate undue non-economic hardship in relation to the use of the land. 5. That approval of the height variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the City Ordinance since it is consistent with the Downtown Plan and the Comprehensive Plan and the refusal to grant the variance would constitute undue hardship with regard to the development of the land. ORDER The City Council of the City of Stillwater pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Chapter 462 and the Zoning Ordinance found in Chapter 38 of the Stillwater City Code does hereby order that the special use permit and variance granted by the City Council on April 8, 1996, together with all conditions of approval imposed thereby be approved and sustained and the appeal be denied. Dated at Stillwater, Minnesota this 21st day of May, 1996. Jay L. Kimble, Mayor Attest: Morli Weldon, Clerk 6