Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-08-13 CPC MINPLANNING COMMISSION • Aug. 13, 1995 Present: Chairman Jerry Fontaine Glenna Bealka, Duane Elliott, Rob Hamlin, Kirk Roetman, Darwin Wald and Terry Zoller Absent: Dorothy Foster and Don Valsvik Others Steve Russell, community development director; Sue Fitzgerald, planning Mr. Fontaine called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. Mr. Elliott asked that the minutes of the July 10 meeting be corrected in the discussion regarding Case No. V/95/43, changing the wording in the third paragraph to: Mr. Elliott suggested the cheapest way to accomplish that (property line definition) would be to have public works lay sufficient curbing to define the street location. Mr. Wald, seconded by Mr. Elliott, moved to adopt the July 10, 1995, minutes as corrected. All in favor Case No. SUP/95-50 Case No. SUP/95-55 Case No. SUP/95-58 These three cases were continued to the Sept. 11 meeting. Mr. Roetman, seconded by Mr. Wald, made the motion to continue the cases; all in favor. Case No. V/95-51 A variance to a previously approved sign program for placement of a 64-square-foot sign at 14328 N. 60th St. in the BP-C, Business Park Commercial District. Kennedy Transmission applicant. Greg Cornell, owner, appeared regarding the request. Two members in the audience spoke in favor of allowing additional signage. Mr. Hamlin noted the city does have a sign ordinance. He suggested the problem appears to be with the landlord and tenants when one client gets 70 percent of the main signage for the center. Signs on the rear of the buildings would not solve that issue, he said. 0 Mr. Fontaine noted a precedent had been set in allowing Tires Plus • additional signage. He said he would follow that precedent as long as the signage is of quality design, like the Tires Plus sign. Mr. Zoller agreed with that position. Mr. Roetman suggested looking at other options, including redistributing the signage on the pylon post. Mrs. Bealka, seconded by Mr. Zoller, moved to approve the variance allowing an additional sign of a maximum of 25 square feet and of a quality in keeping with the precedent set by Tires Plus. Motion passed 5-2, with Mr. Hamlin and Mr. Roetman voting no. Case Nod V95-56 A variance to the sign program for the placement of a second 24 or 64-square-foot sign at 14344 N. 60th St. in the BP-C, Business Park Commercial District. Precision Tune, applicant. Robert Leary appeared regarding the request. He said he had the same problem as Kennedy Transmission regarding visibility of signage. He said he would be willing to do the additional sign like the Tires Plus sign. . Mrs. Bealka, seconded by Mr. Wald, moved approval of an additional 25 square foot sign as conditioned. Vote was 5-2, with Mr. Hamlin and Mr. Roetman voting no. Case No. DP/SUP-95-64 A design review and special use permit for a new collision repair facility consisting of a building of approximately 14,214 square feet to be located at 2000 Curve Crest Blvd. in the BP-I, Business Park Industrial District. Kellison Company, applicant. Jim Kellison appeared regarding the request. Mr. Russell passed out a letter received before the meeting. In response to the letter, Mr. Kellison told the commission the fencing would be wood. He also noted that in an earlier review by the HPC, the owner had agreed to a zig-zagged fence design that will enable landscaping to be placed outside the fencing. Mr. Hamlin, seconded by Mr. Elliott, moved approval as conditioned, including the commitments regarding the fencing; all in favor. Case No. V/95-57 A variance to the rear yard setback (23 feet requested, 25 feet required) for the construction of a four-season porch at 1986 • Tuenge Drive in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Grazelle Burns, applicant. 4 1 Ms. Burns appeared regarding the request. Mr. Zoller asked whether she could make the porch two feet shorter so a variance wouldn't be required. (Later in the discussion, staff pointed out that the a three foot variance, rather than a two foot variance, would be required.) Ms. Burns said shortening the porch by two feet would make it too narrow. She noted her property is at the end of the street and the back of the property faces a cul de sac on the street to the west, so the porch wouldn't give the property a cramped appearance. She said there has been no opposition from neighbors. Mrs. Bealka, seconded by Mr. Roetman, moved approval. In the ensuing discussion, Mr. Wald and Mr. Zoller noted that granting variances has a domino effect. It was also pointed out that Ms. Burns could build a porch within the ordinance guidelines. Motion failed on a 6-1 vote, with Mrs. Bealka voting in favor. Cas e No. V/95-59 A variance to a front yard setback (30 feet required, 12 feet requested) for a 22' x 24' attached garage at 201 Maryknoll Drive in the RA, One Family Residential District. David N. Przybylski, applicant. • Mr. Przybylski appeared regarding the request. He said he would like to build the new garage a nd use t he existing garage for additional living space. He said he had a letter signed by seven neighbors giving their approval of the proposal. He also noted that he has been maintaining the front boulevard area and using it as a parking area ever since he moved into the house. Mr. Elliott pointed out that Croixwood is a major development and all the houses have been built by the book. Other variance requests have been denied based on uniformity unless a hardship is shown. Mr. Przybylski said there is a sharp curve to the street and the proposed garage would not disturb anyone's view. Mr. Elliott, seconded by Mrs. Bealka, moved to deny the request; all in favor. . Case No.--SUP/V/95-61 A special use permit and variance to add a small food service counter to the existing facility at 413 E. Nelson Street in the CBD, Central Business District. Randy Waslien and Deborah Asch, applicants. • Ms. Asch appeared regarding the request. She questioned the staff review which based the need for additional parking on a restaurant use of 1,900 40 square feet; she said the existing retail use is 500 square feet. Ms. Fitzgerald said she used the square footage from when the Commander Elevator was approved for retail space in figuring the additional parking needs. Ms. Asch said she was only asking for a small beverage/food service to serve her existing customers, not the entire building. Mr. Hamlin moved approval, with the conditions that the appropriate health permits be obtained and that there be no additional signage. Mr. Elliott seconded the motion; all in favor. Case No. DP/V/95-65 Design review and variance to side yard setback requirements (9.8 feet requested, 20 feet required) for construction of an attached garage and brick veneer of the north wall of the house at 315 S. Third St. in the CBD, Central Business District. Marlin Eiklenborg, applicant. Mr. Eiklenborg appeared regarding the request. He said he was aware of all the conditions of approval. Mr. Roetman, seconded by Mrs. Bealka, moved approval as conditioned; all in favor. Case No. SUP/95-62 A special use permit to renovate the premises to accommodate automotive use at 14550 N. 60th St. in the BP-C, Business Park Commercial District and Case No. SUP/V/95-63 A special use permit to renovate the premises and variance to the sign ordinance for a second sign at 14550 N. 60th St. Benjamin Smith, applicant. Benjamin and Mark Smith appeared regarding the request. Mark Smith said the owners plan to renovate both the interior and exterior of the building, the former Crown Auto store. The parking area will be repaved and striped; landscaping will be added. The building will be occupied by Car-X and Enterprise Rental, neither of which require cars to be stored on the premises. In additional to the allowable building signage, the request is to have a pylon sign; the owners said they would be willing to keep the pylon sign at its existing location. Mr. Russell noted that because the Crown Auto sign has been removed from the pylon, in terms of the sign ordinance, the permit is null and void; the current pylon placement is within guidelines, however. A resident of 1403 Benson Blvd. cautioned against granting sign variances or Highway 36 will look like Roberts Street for automotive businesses. Another resident of Benson Boulevard said the pylon sign is an existing condition and the variance ought to be allowed. Mr. Russell suggested that if the variance is granted for the pylon sign, it should be a 60 square foot sign, less that the allowable 100 square feet. Ben Smith suggested that to make it equitable for the two building tenants an 8 x 8 sign would make for easy design. Mr. Roetman, seconded by Mrs. Bealka, moved approval of Case No. SUP/95- 62 as conditioned; all in favor. Mr. Hamlin, seconded by Mr. Elliott, moved to approve Case No. SUP/V/95- 63 as conditioned, allowing a pylon sign of up to 65 square feet, maximum 25 feet in height at the existing location, with the additional condition that there be no overnight parking of cars. Motion passed unanimously. Ben Smith asked that the condition of approval requiring fencing of the rear parking area be removed since no cars will be stored on the property. Mr. Zoller, seconded by Mr. Wald, moved to eliminate condition of approval No. 1; all in favor. Case N. DP/SUP/95-60 A design review and special use permit and design review plan for construction of a 20-unit townhouse project just east of Benson Boulevard on West Orleans Street in the RCM, Medium Density Family District. Kornovich Development Company Inc., applicant. Over 50 people were present for this discussion. Mr. Lonnie Kornovich appeared regarding the request. He said he had reviewed staff comments and was open to suggestions. Peggy Ozer, 1579 Driving Park Road, said the No. 1 concern with neighboring property owners is, the potential for increased crime that comes with low-income developments. There are two such developments, Charter Oaks and the Cottages, within a mile of the Highlands area. Stillwater police made 50 calls to Charter Oaks last year and 25 to the Cottages, she said. She asked' that the developer consider owner/occupied townhome units or designating the units for rental to low-income elderly people. She also expressed concern about the vulnerability of the people living in the new handicapped apartment unit. And she asked that the project be buffered with landscaping. Many of the neighbors concerns deal • with property management, she said. Mr. Sussi, of Meets and Bounds Property Management, the firm that would managed the proposed project, said his company manages over 2,000 units in the Twin Cities area. Criminal and credit checks are performed for prospective tenants. He pointed out the proposed development is not for low-income persons, it is for moderate income, working class people. He also said there would be no problem providing screening to the north side of the development. Rick Schroeder, 1402 Lydia Circle, said he was not convinced there was enough parking. He also expressed concern about the safety of the intersection at the hill, where there already is a significant amount of traffic. Wayne Jesky, 1403 Lydia Circle, asked why the property in question had been rezoned. Rocky Picanti, 1555 Benson Blvd., said the park is important to the neighborhood. He expressed a concern that the development would bring a lot of children into the neighborhood and would impact on the current residents' property values. • A resident of 1561 low-income housing family housing. Driving Park Road asked why the city is clustering and also asked why the property was rezoned multi- A number of residents asked why the property was rezoned after they had built their homes. Cindy Olson, 1525 Driving Park Road, noted that Lily Lake school is already crowded. She too asked about the rezoning. Gary Kriesel, 1451 Lydia Circle, said developments such as the one proposed should be built throughout the community so the Highlands area doesn't have the stigma of having all the low-income housing. He also said there should be some benchmark for communities in the provision of low- income' housing, and he asked where the city of Stillwater and other communities are in relation to that benchmark. Mr. Picanti said owner-occupied units would be preferable. He also suggested the city acted hastily in rezoning the property as the Industrial Park is beginning to sell now. (o Harry Ozer, 1579 Driving Park Road, said the city is trying to build a • ghetto with two low-income developments within one-half mile of each other. He said the city is not consistent in its standards -- granting a three-foot variance for construction of a porch would have far less impact on the neighborhood than will a low-income housing development. He said residents in the Highland area bought homes here to raise families and are worried about the quality of life. He reiterated concerns about safety, crime and the proximity to the Courage Center. It's not the right type of development for the area, he said. Dan De St. Aubin, 1390 Benson Blvd., cited overcrowding of schools and parks. Carolyn Hildebrandt, 1555 Driving Park Road, asked that a fence be placed along the property line if the project is approved. A resident of the new handicap-accessible apartment at 1370 Curve Crest Blvd. asked what kind of buffer would be provided at the site. And he expressed a concern about traffic and safety, saying he had almost been hit three times at the stop sign. • Bruce Junker, 1451 Benson Blvd. E., spoke in opposition. Gregory Hanson, 1548 Highland Road, showed a copy of the police calls. He said the city should build improvements that will increase values -- this will lower values, he said. Ann Kriesel, 1451 Lydia Circle, asked how the developer/management company planned to follow through on resident checks, maintenance and appearance. She reiterated that concern later in the discussion. Greg Ries, 1284 Benson Blvd. W., said he lived in an area where a development, such as the one proposed, brought gangs and increased crime. Debby Knowlan, 1363 Benson Blvd., said they bought the property under the assumption the area in question was zoned commercial, not multi-family. Rental ' properties aren't well maintained and residents shouldn't be punished because the city wants to rezone the property, she said. Dave Green, 1543 Driving Park Road, referred to recent problems where police had to be called and said he felt "betrayed" by the city of Stillwater; he said he had been told the area was zoned industrial. 7 r] Mr. Zoller noted the property has been zoned multi-family for at least a year; the rezoning was required in order to build the new handicapped apartment building. Janet Mathews, 1119 Gilbert Court, asked how far along the developer is in the approval process. Sue Fitzgerald responded that the developer has the right to come to the city and ask for approval. Mr. Zoller pointed out that by state law as long as the area is zoned multi-family, the city can't discriminate against potential developers on the basis of age, income, etc. Denial would have to be based on facts that the use doesn't meet the intent of the ordinance. Mr. Hamlin asked where the city stands in providing this type of housing and whether the city has to endorse this type of project. Mr. Russell noted that the city policy is to meet Met Council's guidelines of providing for life-cycle housing. The comprehensive plan, he said, refers to the need for 300 additional housing units for low and moderate income people. Mr. Fontaine asked whether it made good sense for planning purposes to spread such housing throughout the community. Mr. Russell said most older areas of the city do have a mix of housing stock, and he noted that the property is question is one of the few multi-family sites remaining in the 40 city. Kerry Ruedy, 1573 Driving Park Road, asked whether the developer would consider owner-occupied units. The answer was no. Gary Kriesel, 1451 Lydia Circle, noted the 1990 census indicated 84 percent of the Highlands area was renter occupied. He asked what would happen to the proposed housing development if federal policies change. Steve Marker, 1272 Driving Park Road, questioned the need for 300 additional low- moderate-income housing units. He asked how the area could be rezoned back to commercial/industrial. Mr. Russell responded that the residents could petition the city council for rezoning. Mary Jo Boyle, 1356 Benson Blvd., spoke in opposition. Rebecca Olson, caretaker of the handicapped-accessible apartments at 1370 Curve Crest Blvd., expressed a concern about having adequate caretakers for the project. • Terry Hildebrandt, 1555 Driving Park Road, questioned that advisability of 51 clustering low-income housing all in one neighborhood. • A resident of 1427 Lydia Circle also referred to the possibility of the federal government removing tax credits. He asked the developer to consider owner-occupied units. Regarding the need for life-cycle housing, he said senior citizens have a need, too, and would be much more welcome by neighbors. Mr. Fontaine said he thought the property owners and developers should get together to talk about concerns. He said he would consider a motion to continue the hearing. Mr. Hamlin moved to continue the matter until the October meeting to provide residents an opportunity to decide on a course of action and to allow developers to make videotapes of other projects to address concerns about management/maintenance, etc. Mr. Roetman seconded the motion. Mr. Kornovich noted he was under strict time guidelines and he would have to go back to the HRA if there is a delay; he said he would be willing to work with any recommendations from the Planning Commission. 1 Mr. Elliott said he would prefer to delay the issue just one month in order to move the process forward. Mr. Hamlin's motion passed by unanimous vote. Case No. V/95-54 A variance to a side yard setback (10 feet requested, 30 feet required) at 1004 S. Holcombe St. in the RB-Two Family Residential District. City of Stillwater, applicant. Mr. Russell said the house on the property will be demolished because of its poor condition, and the city wants to sell the lot . A variance is required for the setback from Anderson St. Mr. Zoller noted the building would have to be on the westerly side of the lot. Mr. Hamlin, seconded by Mr. Roetman, moved approval with the condition the building be on the westerly portion of the lot; all in favor. Comprehensive Plan upstate Mr. Russell noted that since the April 25 public hearing, the City Council requested a fiscal impact study and engineering information regarding assessment policy and location of utilities. In addition, he said there is a concern about runoff to Brown's Creek; the watershed district is T ? 0 0 recommending a comprehensive study that will take about six month to compete. He said he is hopeful the council will be ready to take action on the Comprehensive Plan by year's end. Mr. and Mrs. Kroening expressed their concern about the delay. They said developing in the township is beginning to look more attractive as it seems less and less likely that the city's Comprehensive Plan will ever happen. They said they would not like to lose the proposed Charles Cudd community and said they would not like to go with Stillwater Township's plan. Mr. Elliott, seconded by Mr. Wald, moved to adjourn the meeting at 11 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sharon Baker Recording secretary jD