Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-04-12 CPC MIN• Planning Commission April 12, 1999 Present: Jerry Fontaine, chairperson Glenna Bealka, Russ Hultman, Holly Owen, John Rheinberger, Darwin Wald, Tom Weidner and Terry Zoller Others: Community Development Director Steve Russell Absent: None Mr. Fontaine called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. Approval of minutes: Mr. Wald, seconded by Mr. Rheinberger, moved approval of the minutes of March 8, 1999, as presented; all in favor. Case No. V/99-13 A variance to the side yard setback (5 ft. required, 1 ft. requested) for construction of a detached garage at 510 N. Fifth St. in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Gilbert Gragert applicant. Mr. Gragert was present. He asked that the condition of approval regarding the 20' height maximum be waived so the pitch of the roof of the new garage could be similar to the house. Mr. • Fontaine stated he was more concerned about the danger/liability of the proposed setback from the front property line than the height of the structure. When asked if the garage could be moved closer to the house, Mr. Gragert noted the house has a metal roof and ice slides off the roof in sheets which would create a problem is the garage is placed any closer. Regarding a question about run-off, Mr. Gragert said there would be eaves on the garage. Mr. Weidner pointed out with the proposed side yard setback, the garage eaves could be on the property line. Mr. Weidner noted there were two concerns: cars parked on the sidewalk and encroachment on the side property line; he suggested the possibility of continuing the request to allow Mr. Gragert to revise the plans. Mr. Gragert stated he would like to try to revise the plans. Mr. Rheinberger, seconded by Mr. Wald, moved to continue the request; all in favor. Case No. V/99-14 A variance to the side yard setback (10 ft. required, 4.1 ft. requested) for construction of a 20 ft. x 20 ft. enclosed porch at 1628 McKusick Lane in the RA, Single Family Residential District. Dan Farr, applicant. Mr. and Mrs. Farr were present. Mr. Farr noted that the structure would be about 27 feet from the neighbor's house; only a portion of the expansion, about 25 square feet, requires a variance. When asked if the addition could be moved to the east, Mr. Farr said he would like to use an existing door. He said creating another access would require tearing up the hot water heating system, which would be very costly. He also noted that neither of his neighbors have objections to the proposal. 1 Planning Commission April 12, 1999 Mr. Fontaine noted that the addition won't have a visual impact on neighboring properties, but the addition could be done without a variance. Mr. Hultman said he was concerned about the encroachment on future property owners. Mrs. Bealka, seconded by Mr. Rheinberger, moved approval as conditioned. Motion passed 6-2, with Ms. Owen and Mr. Weidner voting no. Case No. SUP/V/DR/99-15 A special use permit for residential use in the Central Business District and variance to parking (2 required, 1 available) for the renovation and reuse of a building at 124 N. Main St. Rick Igo, representing Joyce Melton, applicant. Mr. Igo and Mrs. Melton were present. Mr. Igo briefly reviewed plans to renovate the building and construct a new 2,300-square-foot loft residential space in the rear, second-floor of the structure. The front will be renovated to look like the original 1882 storefront, he said. Mr. Igo also noted there is no parking space available in the back of the building. Mr. Karl Ranum, who has office space nearby, expressed his support for the concept. Mr. Rheinberger, seconded by Mr. Wald, moved approval as conditioned; all in favor. • Case No. V/99-16 A variance to the side yard setback (10 ft. required, 5'1" requested) for construction of a 12' x 12' solarium at 1212 N. William St. in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Peggy Schneider, applicant. Ms. Schneider and her son, Chris, were present. Ms. Schneider said there is no other location the solarium can be placed on the property; if the structure is moved to the south, there is a tie-in problem with the roof of the house. Mr. Weidner asked about the height of the solarium. Ms. Schneider said it is about 8' high. There is a 6-foot high fence on the property, W. Weidner noted. Mr. Zoller, seconded by Mr. Hultman, moved approval of the requested variance; all in favor. Case No. V99-17 A variance to construct a single family residence on a non-conforming lot (5,296 square feet, 7,500 required) at 923 S. Sixth St. in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Susan Skalman-Raduenz, applicant. Ms. Skalman-Raduenz and her attorney, Karl Ranum, were present for the discussion. Mr. Fontaine referenced neighbors' correspondence regarding the request. Mr. Ranum stated the property in question is a platted, non-conforming lot. At one time, the property was a buildable lot and is still taxed/assessed as a buildable lot. Houses in the . neighborhood are on similar size lots, he said, and setbacks vary greatly. Mr. Ranum then addressed some concerns raised in the neighbors' correspondence. Regarding runoff, he said 2 Planning Commission April 12, 1999 considerable thought has been given to placement of the proposed new residence to avoid runoff problems. Privacy issues are perceived issues, he stated. Mr. Ranum further stated that he did not think neighbors' property values would be adversely affected. The request is for a free-standing, single-family home, not a twin-home. He also noted the character of homes change dramatically throughout the neighborhood. Mr. Fontaine raised a concern about the proposed front yard setback; Ms. Skalman-Raduenz said there is plenty of room to move the structure farther back on the property if the Commission desires. Speaking in opposition were Wayne and Sandy Henningsgard, 919 S. Sixth St. They expressed concern about compounding the problem of the small lot sizes in the area by adding another home on a lot that is 2,000 square feet less than required by ordinance; the possibility of setting a precedence in granting the variance; and possible impact on property values. Mr. Henningsgard agreed that Ms. Skalman-Raduenz being assessed for two buildable lots could be a hardship, but he said, "her hardship shouldn't become a neighborhood hardship." Also speaking in opposition were Ellen Kane, 1007 S. Sixth St., who submitted written comments outlining her concerns; and Shane Gettis, who lives across the street from Ms. Skalman-Raduenz, and who spoke of the concern about the possible negative impact of the character of the neighborhood. • Mr. Weidner suggested that Ms. Skalman-Raduenz should appeal the assessment rather than place an extra house on a substandard lot. Mr. Hultman agreed with the possible impact on the visual character of the neighborhood and agreed the proper solution would be for the applicant to appeal the assessment. Mr. Russell suggested that since a variance is involved, there might be an option in requiring the applicant to build a home of a design that is more compatible with the neighborhood; Ms. Skalman-Raduenz said she would be willing to look into that option. Mr. Weidner disagreed with that option and the Planning Commission "micromanaging" by becoming a design review committee; the issue, he said, is the nonconforming lot. Mr. Rheinberger, seconded by Mr. Hultman, moved to deny the request; all in favor. Case No. ZAT/99-5 and ZAM/99-2 Zoning Ordinance text amendment and Zoning Map amendment for 14.28 acres of land located west of County Road 5 and north of 62nd Street North from Agricultural Preservation (AP) to Lakeshore Residential (LR). Mr. Rheinberger, seconded by Mrs. Bealka, moved approval of the two cases; all in favor. Case No. ZAT/99-6 and ZAMJ99-3 Zoning Ordinance text amendment and Zoning Map amendment rezoning 11.90 acres of land located east of County Road 5 and north of 62n Street • North from Agricultural Preserve (AP) to Townhome Residential (TH). Planning Commission April 12, 1999 Mr. Rheinberger, seconded by Mrs. Bealka, moved approval of the two cases; all in favor. Case No. PUD/99-18 and SUB/99-19 A concept Planned Unit Development for 13 single-family lots (9.27 acres) and 86 townhome lots (14.91 acres) and a 5.01 acre park west of County Road 5 and north of 62nd Street North and a resubdivision of the property into 13 single lots of 20,000 square foot minimum, 5.01 acre park and 11.90 acres of townhome units. Tim Nolde, applicant. Mr. Weidner abstained from the discussion as his firm represents an affected property owner. Mr. Russell opened the discussion by referencing a letter from James Lammers representing Richard Huelsman, 12610 N. 62nd St. Mr. Russell stated that Mr. Huelsman owns covenants pertaining to the use of the property proposed for park dedication, but Mr. Nolde owns the underlying land. The rights owned by Mr. Huelsman could limit certain park uses, but the property could provide open space/passive park use. Mr. Nolde was present. He stated he is not asking for any variances, has agreed to berm the single-family lots from the townhomes and has done the necessary ponding/wetland analysis. The only issue, he said, is the request for privately-owned/maintained streets in the townhome portion of the development; he is proposing 28-foot streets. . Jon Engelking, 1220 Nightingale Blvd., said affected property owners had not been kept informed of the planning proposal as Mr. Nolde had previously indicated. He said he was not prepared to make an informed argument regarding the plans as he had just seen Mr. Nolde's proposal. Ray Kennedy, 1200 Nightingale Blvd., asked about the orientation of the single-family lots to the existing Nightingale cul-de-sac and where utilities would come from. Dave Harvieux, who lives at the far end of Parkwood Lane adjacent to the townhome development, said he would be against widening the streets as that would push the units closer to his property. He also asked that additional landscaping be provided along the north property line. He also stated he would be totally opposed to making Parkwood Lane a through street at any time. A neighbor of Mr. Harvieux reiterated those concerns. Mr. Zoller asked if the Park Board had reviewed the plans. Mr. Russell noted the park dedication requirement is for 3.14 acres based on density. Mr. Zoller said he agreed with the Fire Chief's concerns regarding access and cul-de-sacs. He suggested tabling the matter for a month to allow more time for discussion and to obtain the Park Board's comments. Mr. Russell noted that narrower streets have been allowed in the Legends/Liberty on the Lake developments. The narrower streets, he said, were a trade-off for the developers providing boulevards and sidewalks. There was a general discussion regarding allowing private streets. i 4 Mr. Nolde said he was not against delaying action on the matter as long as the process keeps moving forward. Mr. Rheinberger, seconded by Mr. Wald, moved to continue the request, Planning Commission April 12, 1999 sending the plans to the Park and Recreation Board for comments and a memo to the City Council regarding public/private streets as proposed by Mr. Nolde; motion carried, with Mr. Weidner abstaining. Case No. ZAT/99-4 A Zoning Ordinance Text amendment regulating adult entertainment business in the Commercial Districts. City of Stillwater, applicant. Mr. Russell noted the required setback from residential areas has been increased to 1,000 feet as suggested. Mr. Rheinberger, seconded by Mr. Wald, moved approval; motion passed unanimously. Case No. ZAT/99-2 A Zoning Ordinance text amendment modifying the accessory units/structure in Traditional Residential (TR) District. City of Stillwater, applicant. Present for the discussion were Marc Putnam and Shelly Tompkins representing Liberty on the Lake developers. Ms. Tompkins and Mr. Putnam said they agreed with nearly all of the proposed regulations, but argued in favor of two changes - that one of the three required covered parking • spaces be allowed to be part of a separate accessory unit, and that the allowable size of a one- story accessory structure with no garage be increased to 500 square feet. Following a brief discussion, Mr. Rheinberger, seconded by Mr. Wald, moved approval with the changes requested by Mr. Putnam and Ms. Tompkins and an additional condition suggested by Mr. Russell that 50 percent of the covered parking spaces not face the street. Motion passed unanimously. Other business • Zoning study for Phase 1 annexation area - Members suggested that the different planning areas - 72°d Street, 62°d Street and Nightingale - be discussed separately. Mr. Wald, seconded by Mr. Rheinberger, moved to adjourn at 10:45 p.m.; all in favor. Respectfully submitted, Sharon Baker Recording Secretary 5