Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-06-08 CPC MIN1 STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Date: June 8, 1992 Time 7 p.m. Members Present: Gerald Fontaine, Chairman Angela Anderson, Glenna Bealka, Duane Elliott, and Don Valsvik Steve Russell, Comm. Dev. Director Ann Pung-Terwedo, Planner Absent: Gene Bealka, Gary Funke, Rob Hamlin, and Darwin Wald Chairman Fontaine called the meeting to order. • APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion by Don Valsvik to approve the minutes of May 11, 1992; seconded by Glenna Bealka. All in favor. PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. V/92-24 - Variance to the approved sign program for an internally illuminated 4' x 8' box sign for Croix Valley Glassworks in the River Heights Auto Repair Mall, 14366 North 60th Street in the Business Park Commercial District, BP-C. Manager Bill Gramenz appeared on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Gramenz state the current signage is almost indistinguishable. He also stated it would cost three times more to have individual letters versus a box-type sign. Steve Russell noted that Croix Valley Glassworks is located at the back of the Mall, with no frontage on the Mall interior. Maximum allowable signage is 25 feet, he said. If the cabinet-type sign is allowed, he recommended that the letters be white with blue plexiglass to match the facade and that the cabinet be painted gray to match the color of the brick. Mr. Gramenz said Croix Valley Glassworks would prefer to have turquoise letters, as turquoise is the company color. He said Suburban Lighting recommended painting the • plexiglass black and just illuminating the letters. 2 Duane Elliott made the motion to approve the requested 32-foot signage, with the condition that Croix Valley Glassworks and its lighting contractor work with city staff in developing an "aesthetically pleasing" sign in design/colors. Angela Anderson seconded the motion. All in favor. Case No. V/92-25. Variance to setback (30 feet required, 14 proposed) to construct a screened porch addition at 212 Deerpath in the Single Family Residential District. Applicants Michael and Beverly Witt appeared on their own behalf. Mr. Witt explained the request is to build a 12 x 14' porch addition to the side of their house. The siding, doors and windows would match the house. He said it is 44 feet from the edge of the curb to the side of the house. (Mr. Elliott pointed out that 15 of that 44 feet is city boulevard area.) Mrs. Witt stated she had contacted all the neighbors and no one had expressed any objections to the building plans. Mr. Russell said the Witt case is "different" in that the residence is on a corner lot and is actually oriented toward the cul-de-sac, Deerpath Court. Mr. Elliott noted that every action the Planning Commission takes can set a precedent. The decision on the Witts' request must be based on a special circumstance, and suggested the orientation of the house to the cul-de-sac represents a "significant difference." He also pointed out that no neighbors were in attendance. Chairman Fontaine added that it is unlikely the boulevard area will ever be used for sidewalks. . Don Valsvik made the motion to approve the variance request due to the special situation of the location of the house, adding that the porch will not visually impact the adjacent homeowners and there is a "visual" 44-foot setback. Glenna Bealka seconded the motion. All in favor. Case No. BM/92-26. Request to move a two-car garage from St. Paul to 728 West Linden Street in the RB, Duplex Residential District. Applicant Richard Orthmeyer appeared on his own behalf. Mr. Russell stated the City Council had approved the variance Mr. Orthmeyer requested to place the garage on the property. He suggested approval of the moving permit be conditioned on roofing and painting the garage to match the residence. Mr. Orthmeyer stated his house would be re-roofed and painted this summer. The garage would be roofed and painted in basically the same color and style as the house, he said. Duane Elliott moved to approve the permit, with the recommended conditions; seconded by Angela Anderson. All in favor. Case No. BM/92-27. Request to move a two-stall garage from St. Mary's Church parking lot to 110 South Everett Street in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Carl • and Kathryn Johnson, applicants. 3 Mrs. Johnson said one mature tree would have to be removed in order to place the garage on the property. She also said she was unsure if she needed a permit since it would be moved in conjunction with Hope House. Mr. Russell said a moving permit is required, but told Mrs. Johnson to check with the Johnson Company (the moving firm) to see if the Hope House permit would cover both moves. Mrs. Johnson noted the garage must be moved by July 17. The tree needs to be taken down and foundation laid prior to the move, and she expressed concern about doing the work without permit approval. While commission members said they couldn't guarantee council approval, they said they saw no problem with the request, suggesting the garage would be an asset to the property and noting the garage would be well within setback requirements. Duane Elliott moved to approve the permit with the recommended conditions that the structure meet setback requirements and that a small shed to removed from the property. Don Valsvik seconded the motion. All in favor. Case No. V/92-11. Continuance of a variance request for an existing six-foot high cedar fence (42 inches allowed) 21 feet from the property line at 623 West Olive Street in the RB, Two Family Residential District. ® Applicant Michelle Elliott appeared on her own behalf. Ms. Elliott explained why the fence was constructed prior to application of the needed variance. She stated that because she owns large dogs, being able to construct a fence was a condition on the purchase of the property. She said she called the building official regarding the fence and was told it must be a foot off the property line, but that no permit was required. Because the home had been condemned prior to Ms. Elliott's purchase, a building official visited the home six months later to see if required improvements had been made; at that time, she was informed there was "a problem" with the fence. Mr. Russell noted the setback requirement is due to the height of the fence. A 48-inch height fence doesn't require a setback. The setback requirement, he said, is to protect neighbors' views. Mr. Fontaine asked whether a variance to both setback and height restricts would be required. Mr. Elliott noted that Planning Commission had approved placement of 60-inch fences on a split vote. However, he pointed out that many of the fences sold a Menard's or Knox exceed the City's height restrictions. People should be advised when they purchase fences that municipalities have regulations regarding height and location. He later suggested putting a handout in Welcome Wagon packets advising new residents out City regulations. Mr. Russell said he would work on a developing a handout listing City regulations relating to fences, swimming pools and signs. -3 Mrs. Johnson said one mature tree would have tc garage on the property. She also said she was un would be moved in conjunction with Hope House. Mr. Russell said a moving permit is required, but Johnson Company (the moving firm) to see if the moves. - Mrs. Johnson noted the garage must be moved I down and foundation laid prior to the move, an, the work without permit approval. While commission members said they couldn't guarantee cv?..._ they saw no problem with the request, suggesting the garage would be an abo, property and noting the garage would be well within setback requirements. Duane Elliott moved to approve the permit with the recommended conditions that the structure meet setback requirements and that a small shed to removed from the property. Don Valsvik seconded the motion. All in favor. Case No. V/92-11. Continuance of a variance request for an existing six-foot high cedar fence (42 inches allowed) 21 feet from the property line at 623 West Olive Street in the RB, Two Family Residential District. • Applicant Michelle Elliott appeared on her own behalf. Ms. Elliott explained why the fence was constructed prior to application of the needed variance. She stated that because she owns large dogs, being able to construct a fence was a condition on the purchase of the property. She said she called the building official regarding the fence and was told it must be a foot off the property line, but that no permit was required. Because the home had been condemned prior to Ms. Elliott's purchase, a building official visited the home six months later to see if required improvements had been made; at that time, she was informed there was "a problem" with the fence. Mr. Russell noted the setback requirement is due to the height of the fence. A 48-inch height fence doesn't require a setback. The setback requirement, he said, is to protect neighbors' views. Mr. Fontaine asked whether a variance to both setback and height restricts would be required. Mr. Elliott noted that Planning Commission had approved placement of 60-inch fences on a split vote. However, he pointed out that many of the fences sold a Menard's or Knox exceed the City's height restrictions. People should be advised when they purchase fences that municipalities have regulations regarding height and location. He later suggested putting a handout in Welcome Wagon packets advising new residents out City regulations. Mr. Russell said he would work on a developing a handout listing City regulations relating to fences, swimming pools and signs. 0 • STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Date: July 13, 1992 Time: 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Gerald Fontaine, Chairman Angela Anderson, Glenna Bealka, Duane Elliott, Gary Funke, Rob Hamlin, and Don Valsvik Steve Russell, Comm. Dev. Director Ann Pung-Terwedo, Planner Absent: Gene Bealka and Darwin Wald Chairman Fontaine reviewed the procedures for hearing cases, discussion, voting and abstaining. He then called the meeting to order. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Don Valsvik noted that on page 3, paragraph 8, the second sentence should read: A 42-inch height fence does not require a setback:. Motion by Glenna Bealka, seconded by Gary Funke to approve the minutes of of June 8, 1992, as amended. All in favor. PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. V/92-28 - Variance to the rearyard setback (20 feet requested, 2; feet required) for construction of a deck at 1203 North Martha Street. Michael Sampson, property owner, presented the request. The request is to replace an existing deck. The two adjacent property owners have given their written approval. Motion by Don Valsvik to approve the variance request since the neighbors have no objection. Seconded by Duane Elliott. All in favor. Case No. SUP/92-29 - A Special Use Permit to operate a three- bedroom Bed and Breakfast at 801 West Pine Street in the RB District. Jon and Rita Graybill, applicants. Case No. SUP/92-30 - A Special Use Permit to operate a four- bedroom Bed and Breakfast at 811 West Pine Street in the RB District. Duane E. Arndt, applicant. t The Commission determined that the two applications should be heard together, since the properties are next door to each other. The City Attorney has informed staff that one does not take precedence over the other because both applications were 1 4 Mrs. Elliott's fence is constructed on a hill. Mr. Fontaine suggested the due to the location of the fence, the reason for the setback restrictions -- protecting neighbors' views -- doesn't apply. He also asked Ms. Elliott whether any of the neighbors had expressed objections about the fence. Ms. Elliott responded that neighbors were "pleased as punch" at the improvements she has made to the property thus far. Mr. Elliott agreed that the placement of the fence on a hill eliminates any major objections. He moved to approve the location of the fence because "topographically" it does not visually impact the adjacent area. All the neighboring yards appear to be at the same level, and the placement of the fence falls outside of the rationale for which the ordinance was written, he concluded. Glenna Bealka seconded the motion. All in favor. R OWELL PARK STUDY Brad Bielenberg, a Stillwater resident and recent graduate of North Dakota State University, reviewed his senior project on the use and design of Lowell Park for Commission members. Consultants Bill Sanders and Rob Williams were on hand to get some preliminary input from Commission members about potential land uses in Lowell Park. MUSIC IN DOWNTOWN and RAVINE PROTECTION ORDINANCE . It was agreed these issues need to be addressed. The matter was referred back to staff for additional research and direction. The meeting was adjourned at 10:15 p.m. Submitted by: Sharon Baker Acting recording secretary