Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-01-11 CPC MINPlanning Commission January 11, 1999 Present: Jerry Fontaine, chairperson Glenna Bealka, Holly Owen, John Rheinberger, Don Valsvik, Darwin Wald and Terry Zoller Others: Community Development Director Steve Russell Absent: Russ Hultman and Tom Weidner Mr. Fontaine called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. He welcomed Ms. Owen to the Commission. Approval of minutes: Mr. Wald, seconded by Mr. Rheinberger, moved approval of the minutes of Dec. 14, 1998; all in favor. Case No. V/99-1 A variance to the front yard setback (30 feet required, 20 feet requested) for construction of a duplex at 211 Owens St. N. in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Thomas Hubman, applicant. Mr. Hubman and his contractor were present. Mr. Hubman said the variance is needed to allow residents to exit on Rice Street without having to back out on the street. The contractor suggested the variance is being requested so the duplex will be as attractive as possible. Sophie Bartkey, 204 N. Williams St., spoke on behalf of her mother who lives next to the property. She expressed a concern about traffic and suggested perhaps a single-family unit would be more appropriate than a duplex. Stuart and Jill Glaser, 202 N. Greeley St., expressed their concerns. Mr. Glaser noted that there is no hardship to warrant granting a variance; economic gain is not a reason for the variance. Mr. Glaser also noted that if a variance is granted and the unit moved forward, it would be inconsistent with the sight line on Owens Street. The Glasers provided written comment for the record in which they also expressed a concern about the possible impact of the design of a new structure on the neighborhood. A resident at 218 N. Owens agreed with Mr. Glaser's comments about economic gain not being a reason for granting a variance. He also expressed a concern about traffic. A resident of 126 N. Greeley said she was concerned about the resale value of her home caused by a modern duplex, as proposed by Mr. Hubman, being constructed in an historic neighborhood. She also cited concerns regarding traffic and safety. Commission members noted the applicant has a lot of sufficient size to construct a duplex without a variance. It was also noted that hardship must be proven in granting a variance, and economics is not a valid hardship. Members agreed that it would be beneficial to have the exit on Rice Street, but also noted that can be accomplished without a variance. Mr. Rheinberger, seconded by Mr. Zoller, moved to deny the requested variance; all in favor. Later in the meeting, Mr. Russell asked if the Commission wanted to deal with design issues such as a modern duplex being constructed as in-fill housing in the city's older neighborhoods. Several members were in Planning Commission January. 11, 1999 agreement that that issue should be addressed. Mr. Fontaine said that would be "too much city." It was agreed that Mr. Russell should put some process together and bring the matter back to the Commission for further discussion. Bergmann/Gadient development conceit Mr. Russell told members he had met with the developers several times since the Commission's December meeting when the concept was initially reviewed. He said he had discussed design criteria for the site, and the developers had developed a modified concept plan in response to the City's guidelines/criteria. Ed Hosek of Westwood Professional Services reviewed the developer's revised plans and provided color graphics and sketches. Also present for the discussion were Roger Tomten, an architectural design consultant for the City, and John Baer of the City's Open Space Committee. Discussions with staff resulted in concept plan 4, Mr. Hosek said. In that plan, a park of 4.8 acres is the focus of the development. All streets are adjacent to the park. There are two accesses to the development, one off Manning Avenue and another off 62°d Street. The plan provides for 142 units on the 28-acre site. In addition to the central park, the plan provides for an additional 3+ acres of ponding/open space. Mr. Hosek suggested the plan 4 maximizes the opportunities of the site. He noted the plan provides for a park large enough to accommodate active recreation such as soccer/baseball fields, preserves the wetlands, provides for open space between the units and uses natural topography/vegetation to separate the housing styles of this development and the Legends development. Mr. Tomten said the new plan starts to incorporate design aspects of the current City, mentioning the Old do Athletic Field as the focal point of that neighborhood as an example. He said the Comprehensive Plan talks about creating neighbors and this plans starts to "feel like that." Members were in general agreement that the plan represented a good trade-off of maximizing park space and potentially preserving the woods on the Gradient property when that piece is developed sometime in the future by allowing higher density, clustering of housing units. The density in plan 4 is 5 units per acre, rather than 3 per acre as indicated in the City's Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Zoller asked whether that change would require review by the Metropolitan Council. Mr. Russell said he was not clear on that point, but noted that the plan provides for a variety of housing types, which is a goal of the Metropolitan Council. Mr. Zoller also noted that the City would have to explain to Stillwater Township why the City was allowing a density of five units per acre, rather than three, as had been discussed in the annexation proceedings. Mr. Fontaine said it would be important for the City's Park Board and Open Space Committee to support the plan. The plan will be going before the Joint Board on Jan. 20 for that body's review/comments. The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sharon Baker Recording Secretary n