Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-12-11 CPC MIN• City of Stillwater Planning Commission December 11, 2000 Present: Chairperson, Jerry Fontaine, Glenna Bealka, Robert Gag, Russ Hultman, Dave Middleton, Karl Ranum, John Rheinberger, Darwin Wald and Terry Zoller Others: Community Development Director, Steve Russell. Absent: None CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Mr. Fontaine at 7 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Mr. Fontaine asked if there was any discussion. Hearing none, Mr. Fontaine asked for a motion to accept the minutes. MOTION: A motion was made by Mr. Rheinberger to accept the minutes of the meeting. Mr. Gag seconded the motion to accept the minutes. Mr. Fontaine asked for any further discussion, hearing none a vote was requested. The minutes of the meeting of November 13, 2000 were approved unanimously. Case No. V/00-82 . A variance to the side yard setback (30 feet required, 15 feet requested) and • the rear yard setback (25 feet required, 22 feet requested) at 618 Burlington Street in the RB, Two-Family Residential District for the construction of a three season porch and deck. Mr. William and Mrs. Paula Snyder are the applicants. DISCUSSION: Mr. Snyder was in attendance and addressed the commission. Mr. Snyder expressed some confusion regarding the recommendations and the conditions of approval. Of concern was the denial of the rear yard setback. With discussion it was established that Mr. Snyder was building the deck to the addition at the rear of the home and also to the side of the main house, which was not beyond the limits of the existing house. Mr. Russell established that the house was not placed according to code within the setback guidelines, which is often the case with older homes, and therefore non-compliant. Mr. Snyder then requested that the denial of the rear yard setback request be stricken as it relates to the existing house, as it is all non-conforming on the property. The deck is flush with the house and the existing rear addition and it is in line with the total base of the house. Mr. Snyder questioned the staff's opinion that the deck could be built at 9' x 12' instead of 9' x 15'. The addition fits flush with the house on one side and also flush with the addition. Mr. Snyder did not think that three steps from the deck would affect anything. Mr. Fontaine asked if there was anyone in attendance who would like to address the Committee requiring the variance that was being requested. Mr. & Mrs. Orwin • City of Stillwater Planning Commission December 11, 2000 Carter requested to address the committee. Mrs. Carter expressed dismay that Mr. Snyders had not informed them of any variance request. Mrs. Carter said that other neighbors had informed her that they had been approached to sign that the variance was acceptable to them. Mr. Snyder explained that the Carter Residence could not be viewed from his residence. Mr. Carter explained that his property was east of Mr. Snyder's property and that there has been run-off of water onto his property as it sits lower than the Snyder's residence. Mr. Carter explained that the road and curve, that is newer, had help remedy some of the problem of run-off water and that now Mr. Carter's run-off is in addition to what comes down the street onto his property. Mr. Carter wanted to know how any planned building would affect any additional run- off of water onto his property. It was discussed at this time if the slope of the roof could be changed to allow run-off in the other direction away from Mr. Carter's property. Mr. Snyder explained that the roofline matches the front and could not be changed. It was suggested that there be two downspouts facing toward the south where there was more ground to absorb the run-off water as a possible solution to help the Carter's problem related to their lowered elevation. • Mr. Fontaine asked if there was a motion to grant the variance with the condition of the two downspouts for run-off water. MOTION: A motion was made by Mr. Gag and seconded by Mr. Middleton to accept the variance request with the Conditions of Approval and an amendment that two south facing down spouts be used to direct the run-off water to the south side of the property away from the Carter's residence. Mr. Fontaine asked if there was any discussion and hearing none requested a vote. The vote to accept the variance with the conditions and amendment was unanimous. Mr. Fontaine informed Mr. Snyder that there was a 10-day wait to allow for any additional complaints to be filed regarding the variance by anyone who would object. Case No. V/00-83. A variance to the front yard setback (15 feet required, 3'6" requested) for a freestanding signboard at 110 East Myrtle Street in the CBD, Central Business District. Mr. Mark Balay was the applicant. DISCUSSION: Mr. Balay was in attendance at the meeting and addressed the Committee. Mr. Balay said that he intends three lease units at the home (building) and request that the sign be visible to cars on the street. Mr. Balay explained the existing topography and the building setback from the front property line necessitates the sign. The Committee reviewed the conditions of approval with Mr. Balay. 9 2 • City of Stillwater Planning Commission December 11, 2000 MOTION: Mr. Fontaine requested a motion from the floor. Mr. Rheinberger made a motion to accept the variance with conditions of approval and Mr. Gag seconded the motion, Mr. Fontaine asked if there was any further discussion, hearing none, called the request for a vote to the floor. The vote to allow the variance was unanimous. Case No. V/00-84. A variance to the rear yard setback (20 feet required, 2 feet requested) for the construction of an addition at 602 North Main Street in the CBD, Central Business District. Applicant is Jill Greenhalgh for the Washington County Historical Society. DISCUSSION: Mr. Balay, architect and Jill Greenhalgh were in attendance at the meeting to address the Committee. It was explained that the variance is requested to house a public restroom and utility room. It was established that originally it was an outhouse. The conditions of approval were addressed with Ms. Greenhalgh. Mr. Fontaine asked if there was anyone in attendance at the meeting who would like to address the Commission. Mr. Thorson, owner of the bed and breakfast that is directly connected to the Washington County Historical Society's property in the back and up a steep hill arose and requested to address the Committee. Mr. Thorson expressed concerns about a large cave he has • and the erosion of topsoil over the cave that had been used to store coal years ago. Mr. Thorson explained that the only access he has to the two entrances to the cave must be accessed through the WCHS property. Mr. Thorson was concerned that the addition may cause erosion to his property and cause a collapse of the cave that could possibly damage the new addition. The discussion followed concerning: 1. Liability of Mr. Thorson in event of collapse of cave to the WCHP. 2. Liability of the City if it grants a variance to build and if that building would have any effect on a potential collapse of the hill by erosion. 3. Would it be "An act of God" in the event of collapse? It was established that the retaining wall was the property of the WCH and that at the top of the retaining wall was Mr. Thorson's property where it ended. It was also established that there is a roadway that was plotted and not ever used that exist where part of the addition will go on the property. It was also established that the addition is placed two feet from the property line. After much discussion, it was determined that it would be "An Act of God" if the cave collapsed. And that, Mr. Thorson should have a written statement from the WCH that he can have access through the WCH property to access the two entrances to his cave. It was also established that there could not be a release from any liability attached to this variance that would release Mr. Thorson from liability in the event of any collapse. From the City's perspective, any collapse of the cave would be "An Act of God". 40 • City of Stillwater Planning Commission December 11, 2000 MOTION: Mr. Fontaine requested that a motion be made from the floor. Mr. Rheinberger motioned that a variance is granted with the conditions of Approval and Mr. Hultman seconded the motion. Mr. Fontaine asked if there was any further discussion, hearing none the vote was taken: Ayes: Mr. Fontaine, Ms. Bealka, Mr. Gag, Mr. Hultman, Mr. Middleton, Mr. Ranum, Mr. Rheinberger and Mr. Wald. Nays: Mr. Zoller. The vote was eight to one in favor of granting the variance. *The next three variances all apply to David Bernard Builders. Case No. ZAM/00-09. A Zoning Map Amendment rezoning 65,000 square feet of land from Cottage Residential, CR to Townhouse Residential. TH located in the Liberty Development east of CR 15 and south of CR 12. David Bernard Builders, applicant. Case No. PUD/00-85. Final Planned Unit Development for a 51-unit condominium developing • on 10 acres of land located in the Liberty Development east of CR 15 and south of CR 12. David Bernard Builders, applicant. Case No. SUB/00-86. A final plat approval for a 16 lot, 51-condominium unit subdivision located east of CR 15 and south of CR 12. David Bernard Builders, applicant. DISCUSSION: In attendance to address the three above variance requests was Mr. J. Michael Noonan, representative for David Bernard Builders and Developers and Mr. Homer Tompkins, property owner. Mr. Noonan addressed the Committee to explain that the request was to rezone 1.5 acres of land from Cottage Residential to Townhouse Residential. Mr. Noonan explained that the preliminary plat shows 7-8 parcels (HU's) on the 1.5 acres. The approved Townhouse zoning allowed for 40 units while the proposed Townhouse PUD indicates 51 condominium units or 3-4 more housing units then is allowed by the existing zoning. The overall unit count for the Liberty Development is less than what is allowed by the Comprehensive Plan. It was mentioned that the duplex option for corner lots (15) have not been used and the original overall preliminary plat was 17 units less than the Comprehensive Plan permitted density. Mr. Noonan further explained that the proposed zoning changes more clearly separates the townhouse units from the single family units rather than using the backs of the single-garages. When questioned about two single floor units, Mr. Noonan explained that the two single floor units were actually attached at the ends of the Condominium and had elevated rooflines but were single floor units. One of the units has a loft and the other single floor plan does not have a loft. 4 City of Stillwater Planning Commission December 11, 2000 In questioning the development, the issue of the roadway allowing for a 24-foot road to allow the fire trucks to be able to have access was discussed. Originally a 20-foot road was planned but unacceptable. This allowance for 24 feet pushed the project forward which violated the restrictions of setback for the condominium a few feet. A request to allow for two set points, which violates the setback by a few feet, was made. It was considered necessary to allow for the two set points, one a block long, that would allow for the increase in road size from 20 to 24 feet for emergency vehicles to have access. The request was made to change condition of approval number one and number two to read 25 feet. And, change numbers three and number four to allow for density change. Mr. Fontaine requested that each variance be voted on separately. MOTION: A motion was made by Mr. Gag and seconded by Mr. Middleton to allow for a Amendment rezoning 65,000 square feet of land from Cottage Residential, CR to Townhouse Residential, TH located in the Liberty Development east of CR 15 and south of CR 12. A vote was taken and it was in favor unanimously. MOTION: A motion was made by Mr. Gag and seconded by Mr. Hultman to accept the final • planned Unit Development for a 51 unit condominium developing on 10 acres of land located in the Liberty Development east of CR 15 and south of CR 12. A vote was taken and it was in favor of granting the variance unanimously. MOTION: A motion was made by Mr. Mr. Rheinberger and seconded by Ms. Bealka to accept the final plat approval for a 16 lot, 51 condominium unit subdivision located east of CR 15 and south of CR 12 with the provision (amendment) that a 25 foot setback be approved. A vote was taken and the vote was unanimous. Other Items: A memorandum from Cindy Shilts, Acting Building Official, to Steve Russell, Community Development Director was discussed. It was commendable that Ms. Shilts was reporting any existing problems to Mr. Russell. It was mentioned that follow-up was important in addressing issues concerning permit violations and the necessity for any variance to be brought to the attention of Mr. Russell and the Planning Commission as this memorandum had established. ADJOURNMENT: Mr. Fontaine asked for a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:20 p.m. The motion was made by Mr. Rheinberger and seconded by Mr. Gag to adjourn the meeting. All were in favor. Respectfully submitted Diane Martinek Recorder