HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-07-10 CPC MIN
PLANNING COMMISSION
July 10, 1995
Present: Glenna Bealka, Duane Elliott, Dorothy Foster, Rob Hamlin,
Kirk Roetman, Darwin Wald and Terry Zoller
Absent: Chairman Jerry Fontaine and Don Valsvik
Others Steve Russell, community development director
Mr. Hamlin served as acting chairman and called the meeting to order at 7
p.m.
Darwin Wald, seconded by Dorothy Foster, moved approval of the minutes
of June 12, 1995; all in favor.
Case No. DP/SUP/V/95-47. Continuation of a design permit and special use
permit and variances to the side yard and front yard setbacks (0 feet
requested, 15 feet required for the side yard and 0 feet requested, 10 feet
required for the front yard) and for parking requirements (5 spaces
• required, 2 spaces requested) for construction of a structure containing
three residential units and 16x16 office space at 311 S. Third St. in the
CBD, Central Business District. Brian Larson, applicant.
Mr. Nolde and Mr. Larson, architect, appeared regarding the requests.
Mr. Russell pointed out there is a provision in the ordinance which allows
structures in the downtown district to be up to the property line; granting
the variance is up to the determination of the Planning Commission. Mr.
Larson said the "footprint" of the new structure will be similar to the
existing structure.
Mr. Elliott raised a question about parking and asked whether the below
grade lot of the building to the north could be expanded. He said he felt the
steep slope of the drive as proposed would be impossible to maneuver. Mr.
Nolde noted there is a city parking lot available for use. Later in the
discussion, it was pointed out that two spaces are provided for tenants;
the existing dwelling units have no on-site parking. Mr. Russell said the
city tries to maximize parking in the downtown area, but not to the point
of discouraging development/redevelopment.
Fred Kalinoff, owner of a nearby apartment building, said he thought the
proposal would be an improvement over the existing building, and he said
parking in the area is always a problem.
Ken Weissner, resident of Val Croix Condominiums said he would like to
see an improved building, but one that is no closer than the existing
building and that would not infringe on the existing space.
Marlin Eiklenborg, owner of the adjacent property, said his only concern
was the easement the Noldes have on his property for driveway purposes.
He said he would not want to have to dig up his existing driveway. Mr.
Nolde agreed to raise the elevation of the common driveway so Mr.
Eiklenborg will not have to dig up his drive.
Richard Kilty, 118 W. Oak St., said he would like to see more on-site
parking. David Hanson, also owner of an apartment complex, agreed that
off-street parking should be provided.
Mr. Zoller asked whether the developers were aware of the
recommendations made by the Heritage Preservation Commission. Mr.
Larson said he felt the HPC's recommendations/concerns can be addressed
as more detailed plans are developed. Mr. Hamlin expressed his concern
• about giving approval; the final building product is often totally different
than indicated in preliminary sketches, he said. He said he would like to
see a more solid commitment regarding materials and design.
Mr. Russell suggested the Planning Commission could give concept
approval with the condition that the developers return to the commission
with specific details as final plans are developed. Concept approval does
not commit the commission to giving final approval, he noted.
Mrs. Bealka, seconded by Mr. Roetman, moved concept approval as
conditioned; all in favor.
Case No. V/95-49. A variance to the sign height (25 feet required, 30 feet
requested) for the replacement of the Stillwater Inn sign at 1750 W.
Frontage Road in the BP-C, Business Park Commercial District. Tim
Balstad, applicant.
Mr. Balstad said the requested is due to a new logo identity Best Western
adopted last year. The request is to remove the existing sign and place the
new sign in the same location.
10 Mr. Elliott noted that because the existing sign is placed about five feet
below grade, a variance technically probably isn't needed. He moved
approval of the 30 foot sign height, with the consideration that the sign
posts are 5 feet below grade. Mr. Wald seconded the motion, all in favor.
Q.. This case was continued until the August meeting.
This case was continued until the August meeting.
Case No. SUP/95-52. A special use permit for construction of a 12'x20'
storage shed at 900 N. Owens St., Stonebridge Elementary School, in the
RB, Two Family Residential District. John Johnson, applicant.
Mr. Johnson said the request is to construct a shed to allow for storage of
gas engine equipment -- lawn mowers, snowblowers, etc. -- at least 20
feet away from the school building. The shed will be a Lampert's type shed
and will not be visible from the street.
Mr. Wald, seconded by Mr. Roetman, moved approval as conditioned; all in
favor.
Case No. SUP/95-53. A special use permit to conduct a massage therapy
is business out of the home at 1202 W. Myrtle St. in the RA, Single Family
Residential District. Lauren A. Fouks, applicant.
Ms. Fouks said a portion of her business will be conducted at area health
clubs and golf courses. The home portion of the business would be limited
to treating clients at her home two or three days per week. No more than
one client would be treated at one time; there is adequate off-street
parking.
Kay Boyce, 1222 W. Myrtle St., asked Ms. Fouks about her training, how she
gets clients, proposed hours of operation and signage. Ms. Fouks said she is
certified through the Minneapolis School of Massage and Body Work;
clients are obtained primarily through referrals from physical therapists.
Ms. Fouks said her home business hours would be variable - probably
Thursday, Friday, and Saturday morning and some evenings.
Ms. Fouks requested that she be allowed to place a small business sign
above her mailbox. She agreed to a sign no larger than 6"x12".
A concern was raised regarding the transferability of the special use
permit should Ms. Fouks sell the residence. The special use permit would
not transfer to the new owner.
10
is
Mr. Roetman moved approval as conditioned, with the additional condition
that the special use permit is not transferable to a new owner should the
residence be sold and allowing a 6x12" sign on the mailbox. Mrs. Bealka
seconded the motion; all in favor.
Case No. V/95/43. A variance to the side yard setback (14 feet requested,
30 feet required) to expand an existing garage at 212 Sixth St. So, in the
RB, Two Family Residential District. Brent and Wendy Johnson, applicants.
Mr. Johnson said plans for the garage addition had been scaled back 8 feet
since he first appeared before the commission. He said he had talked with
all neighbors and no one objected. He also said Barry Stack had been
contacted to confirm the property line; the property line does extend out
into the street at one corner of the lot and has been become part of the
roadway over the years. Mr. Johnson said he thought the unique situation
represented a hardship. And he said he thought expanding the garage to the
front would have less of an impact than expanding to the rear due to
drainage issues.
There was some discussion as to the benefit of defining the corner
property line. Mr. Elliott suggested the cheapest way to accomplish that
would be to have Public Works lay a small strip of bituminous up to the
garage. Mr. Roetman suggested adding a condition that the garage not be
used as a dwelling unit, as well as having the property line definition be
reviewed by the Public Works Department and Mr. Russell.
Mr. Elliott, seconded by Mr. Wald, moved as conditioned; all in favor.
Mrs. Bealka, seconded by Mrs. Foster, moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:40
p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Sharon Baker
Recording secretary
0