HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-11-13 CPC MIN• City of Stillwater
Planning Commission
Monday, November 13, 2000
7 p.m.
Present: Jerry Fontaine. Members: Members: Glenna Bealka, Robert Gag, Russ Hultman, Dave
Middleton, Karl Ranum, John Rheinberger, Darwin Wald and Terry Zoller.
Absent: None
Others: Steve Russell, Community Development Director:
Jerry Fontaine called the meeting to Order at 7:05 p.m.
Approval of minutes. Mr. Fontaine, hearing no comments asked if a motion could be made to
accept the minutes of the meeting of October 9, 2000.
The motion to accept the minutes was made by Mr. Wald and seconded by Mr. Ranum. All were
in favor.
1. Case No. SUB/00-69. A modification to the subdivision regulations for shape of lot for Lots
7, 8 and 9, Block 4, Hersey, Staples and Co's Addition to Stillwater (1330 3rd Ave So. ) into
• two lots, Lot 1 containing 7,566 square feet and Lot 2 containing 12,614 square feet in the
RB, Two Family Residential District. Thomas S. Peulen, applicant. (Continued from October
8, 2000 meeting). Mr. Fontaine stated that this issue was addressed at the City Council
Meeting and approved.
2. Case No. V/00-76. A variance to the side yard setback (10 feet required, 8 feet requested) for
an existing residence at 1330 3rd Avenue South in the RB, Two Family Residential District.
Thomas Peulen, applicant.
Mr. Peulen approached the Commission to explain the necessity of the variance, which he
said, would not affect his neighbor. Dennis Breu of 1318 3rd Ave. South, neighbor to Mr.
Peulen, approached the Commission to ask questions regarding his property line. It was
explained that the variance would not affect his property line. Hearing no further discussion a
motion was made by Mr. Gag and seconded by Mrs. Bealka to accept the variance.
A vote was taken and all approved the variance.
3. Case No. V/00-74. A variance to the side yard setback (30 feet required, 18 feet requested)
for the construction of a 12x12-screen house at 107 Lakeside Drive in the RB, Two Family
Residential District. Colleen Weiss, applicant.
Discussion: Ms. Weiss said that the construction was in her back yard where no one should
notice it behind her garage. Ms. Weiss said that she asked her neighbors and no one objected.
• The subject of the construction being an accessory structure was mentioned. The
City of Stillwater
Planning Commission
November 13, 2000
construction would be considered accessory because it is free standing. The subject of the
square footage was brought up because the structure Ms. Weiss suggests is 144 square feet.
The standard square feet that can be built without a permit would be 120 square feet. The
subject that the footings are already in was addressed in relationship to the permit. It was
explained that Ms. Weiss has very little actual back yard. Hearing no objections from the
audience, Mr. Fontaine asked for two motions:
1. A motion for a variance request on the setback (30 feet required, 18 feet requested) was
motioned by Mr. Hultman and seconded by Mr. Zoller. All were in agreement and the
motion passed.
2. A motion for a variance request on a larger structure (144 square feet over the 120 square
feet) was motioned by Mr. Hultman and seconded by Mr. Rheinberger. All were in
agreement and the motion passed.
Mr. Fontaine instructed Ms. Weiss and her builder that construction could not start for 10
days to allow for any objections.
3. Case No. V/00-75 A variance to the parking lot setback requirements for construction of
parking lot with 10 foot setback from front property line (20 feet required) at 1709
Greeley Street in the BP-1, Business Park Industrial District. John Diana, applicant.
Discussion: Mr. Diana approached the Commission for discussion. The question of why
the concrete slab was already poured was presented. Mr. Diana explained that the
contractor, at his suggestion, submitted a plan, but that he did not know that a permit was
needed. Mr. Diana explained that if he was in violation, that he would remove anything
that would be in violation. There was discussion about covering up some of the parking
spaces with a planter or buffer. The question came up about how safe it was to make a
tight right turn from the parking space. It was suggested that some of the concrete be cut
back and possibly use the concrete slab for a turnaround. It was suggested that perhaps
the City Engineers could look at slab that was poured.
A motion was made by Mr. Zoller that the variance is denied because of the twenty-foot
requirement. Mr. Hultman seconded the motion.
Ayes: Mr. Fontaine, Mrs. Bealka, Mr. Hultman, Mr. Middleton, Mr. Ranum, Mr. Wald and Mr.
Zoller.
Nays: Mr. Gag and Mr. Rheinberger.
A motion was made to revisit the subject. Community Development Director Steve Russell
offered to work with the applicant. A new motion was made that some of the concrete was to be
removed to maintain the 20-foot set back and that Mr. Diana works with the city for an egress.
• City of Stillwater
Planning Commission
November 13, 2000
Mr. Zoller made the motion to accept the new motion and Mr. Wald seconded the motion. All
were in favor.
5. Case No SUP/00-77. A special use permit for a Type 11 Home Occupation Permit for a
massage therapy business at a residence located at 2160 Oak Glen Trail in the RA, Single
Family Residential District. Mary Schulte, applicant.
Discussion: Mrs. Schulte approached the Planning Commission. Ms. Schulte stated that the
correct footage of the residence was 2052 square feet in size. Mrs. Schulte said that everyone
has been very supportive of her business and that the neighbors had no objections. Mr.
Fontaine asked if there were any objections from the audience. Finding no objections Mr.
Fontaine requested that a motion be made.
Mr. Ranum made a motion to accept the special use permit for a Type 11 Home Occupation
Permit. The motion was seconded by Mr. Wald. All agreed to allow the special use permit and
the motion passed.
6. Case No. SUP/00-79. A special use permit to replace an existing sign with an internally
. illuminated sign at 1616 West Olive Street in the RA, Single Family Residential District.
Pastor Steven Molin, Our Saviors Lutheran Church, applicant.
Discussion: The design of the sign was discussed and the elevations. A motion was made that
brick would be used and that one side would have a two-foot elevation and the other side
would have 18 inches of the proposed sign.
The motion to approve a special use permit to replace an existing sign with the above-mentioned
conditions was made by Mrs. Bealka and seconded by Mr. Rheinberger. All approved and the
motion passed.
7. Case No. V/00-80 A variance to the Zoning Ordinance height requirements to place two
radio antennas on top of the Washington County Government Center at 14949 62nd Street
North in the RA, Single Family Residential District. Bernie Morency representing
Washington County Government Center, applicant.
Discussion. Mr. Steve Pott approached the Planning Commission to discuss the proposed
antennas. It was explained that there was a need for a two-way antenna as there is nothing
right now for two-way telecommunications. The height was discussed. A variance is
requested to the height limits for installation of a 17 foot and 22 foot long antenna. The
antennas would be used by the Sheriff's Department for communications. It is believed that
the visual impact of the antennas is minimal from surrounding areas and the antennas are
needed for public health and safety. Without any comment or objection from the audience,
. Mr. Fontaine requested that a motion be made.
City of Stillwater
Planning Commission
November 13, 2000
A motion to approve the variances to allow for the placement of two radio antennas was made by
Mr. Middleton and seconded by Mr. Gag. All were in favor and the motion passed.
8. Case No. SUP/00-81. A special use permit use determination for 1655 Market Drive to
conduct a light industrial with retail sales use in the BP-C, Business Park Commercial.
Kellison Company, applicants.
Discussion: Debbie Pierre approached the Planning Commission to discuss the special use
permit. The sewing room was discussed. The motion to approve the special use permit was
presented by Mr. Middleton and seconded by Mr. Wald.
All agreed and the motion passed.
OTHER ITEMS
Consideration of priority trail improvements.
Discussion: Mr. Russell presented a map to show the Planning Commission the proposed trail
improvements. The priority of which trails should be improved first was discussed. Mr. Russell
then took a hand vote on the following sites:
1. Neal - It was thought that Neal had a wide surface and there were no
Show of hands in favor of improvements at this time.
2. Olive- There was a show of six hands in favor of improvements.
3. Holcomb- There was a show of nine hands in favor of improvements.
4. Curve Crest- There was a show of eight hands in favor of improvements.
5. Amundson- No show of hands
6. Eagle Ridge- There was no show of hands
7. 12 - There was one show of hands
8. Boutwell- There was one show of hands.
It was agreed that Holcomb, Curve Crest and Olive, in that order, were most important in favor
of improvements.
Mr. Fontaine called for a motion to adjourn at 8:50 p.m. All in favor.
Respectfully submitted,
Diane Martinek
Recording Secretary
0