Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-08-13 CPC MINCity of Stillwater Planning Commission August 13, 2001 Present: Russ Hultman, Chair Glenna Bealka, Robert Gag, Dave Middleton, Karl Ranum, Paul Teske, Darwin Wald and Terry Zoller Others: Community Development Director Steve Russell Mr. Hultman called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. Approval of minutes: Mr. Wald, seconded by Mr. Gag, moved approval of the minutes of July 9, 2001; motion passed unanimously. Case No. SUP.DR/01-26 This case has been tabled indefinitely. Case No. SUP/01-33 A special use permit for Tom Thumb Food Market to add another pump island at 2601 W. Orleans St. in the BP-C, Business Park Commercial District. Mike Eichel, Tom Thumb representative, applicant. Mr. Eichel was present. He noted that the additional pump was in the original plans. Because two years had elapsed since the original permit, the applicant needed an up-to-date survey. Mr. 40 Eichel said they had worked with City Engineer Klatyon Eckles regarding the curb cut. Mr. Ranum, seconded by Mr. Wald, moved approval as conditioned. Motion passed unanimously. Case No. SUP.01-36 A special use for a home-based sewing business at 2337 Van Tassel Court N. in the RA, Single Family Residential District. Joe and Joan Tlustos, applicants. The applicants were present. They explained that all work is done by appointments, generally one at a time. Customers park on the driveway. Mr. Wald, seconded by Mrs. Bealka, moved approval as conditioned; motion passed unanimously. Case No. V/01-37 A variance to the front (20 feet required, 17 feet requested) and side (5 feet required, 4.9 feet requested) yard setbacks for construction of a residence at 3213 Summer Fields Court in the TR, Townhouse Residential District. David Dorn, Senn and Youngdahl, applicant. Mr. Russell noted a variance also is needed for the porch setback (6 feet, versus the required 10 feet). Mr. Dorn explained the variances are necessary due to a mistake caused by miscommunication with a subcontractor. The mistake wasn't discovered until the structure was all framed up. Mr. Ranum asked if the applicant had put mechanisms in place to prevent similar errors in the future. Mr. Dorn said now rear stakes are required as well as front stakes. 1 City of Stillwater Planning Commission August 13, 2001 Mr. Ranum, seconded by Mr. Zoller, moved approval as conditioned; motion passed unanimously. Case No. V/01-38 A variance to the front yard setback (30 feet required, 14 feet requested) for construction of a 180-square foot deck at 906 Fifth Ave. S. in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Maurice Stenerson, representing John Prosser, applicant. Mr. Prosser was present, along with attorney Scott MacDonald. Mr. Prosser showed a series of photos of neighbors' views of the river. He suggested the only thing neighbors may object to is the support pose for the proposed deck. Mr. Prosser also noted that the view of the river was obstructed before he cleared his lot. He pointed out that the three houses to the south of his have front setbacks of 6.5 feet or less and can barely see his house. Mr. Prosser also raised the issue of the adjoining property owner, David Hartung's, deck being 3.5 feet onto the city right-of-way. He provided surveys highlighting setbacks and encroachments on properties, including the fact that a portion of Mr. Hartung's house is on his property. Mr. MacDonald raised the issue of Mr. Ranum's participation in the discussion due to Mr. Ranum's previous association with Mr. Hartung when this case was first heard two and one-half • years ago. Mr. Ranum subsequently abstained from the discussion/vote. Mr. MacDonald discussed three legal issues involved: hardship; need for a variance; and any detrimental impact on adjacent properties. Mr. MacDonald briefly addressed the first two issues, referring to the configuration of the lot and slope of the property as a hardship. He stated the real issue is the question of whether Mr. Hartung's view is being impeded. Mr. MacDonald suggested that Mr. Hartung's view of the river is there because Mr. Prosser cleared his property. And, he suggested that Mr. Hartung's view could be lost at any time through perfectly legal means, such as planting of some trees. He concluded that the request does not represent an unreasonable intrusion on neighbors' views. Mr. Hartung, 910 S. Fifth Ave., stated the proposed deck would be a significant impediment to this view. Todd and Audrey Hanson, neighbors directly to the west, also addressed the Commission. The Hansons stated they had no objection to the deck but wanted to know when Mr. Prosser was going to remove the shed which was a condition of approval when he was granted a variance to construct another garage. Mr. Prosser said he would remove the shed as soon as the garage is completed and agreed to have the shed removed before Nov. 1. Mr. Zoller noted that the Commission had considerable discussion on this request when it was first presented and denied two years ago; he questioned what had changed in those two years. Mr. Zoller pointed out that property lines and encroachment on city right-of-way have no bearing on the request due to the fact that in old neighborhoods, where houses were constructed over 100 years ago, many of the property lines are incorrect, with the errors compounded as additional • 2 City of Stillwater Planning Commission August 13, 2001 houses were built. Mr. Zoller summed up that in this instance, neighbors feel the request would be detrimental to their property. Mr. Zoller, seconded by Mr. Teske, moved to deny the request. Motion passed 7-0-1, with Mr. Ranum abstaining. Case No. V/01-39 A variance to the height regulations (35 feet required, 80 feet proposed) for construction of a memorial to Stillwater High School veterans in the Riverview parking lot, PA, Public Administrative Office District. Brian Larson, Larson Brenner Architects, and Memorial to High School Veterans Committee applicants. Present were Brian Larson and several members of the Memorial Committee, including Dave Swanson, Dick Olsen and Gary Wisbar. Mr. Larson provided a brief history of the project and sketches of the proposed memorial. Mr. Olsen noted the named has been changed to Veterans Memorial for Stillwater Area Schools, so all veterans will be remembered. Mr. Larson also noted meetings had been held with neighbors to gain their input. Mr. Zoller asked about lighting. Mr. Larson said the intent is to light the base of the memorial so the names can be read and said the Committee is aware of the concern that the lighting not be • intrusive. Mr. Larson also stated the flag will be lighted with a tightly focused light. Mr. Ranum asked if any parking spaces would be lost. Mr. Larson said two handicapped spaces will be lost but replaced; he said they could re-stripe the lot if need be. Mr. Ranum stated he was concerned about the height of the memorial, and stated that if the proposed vegetation doesn't grow, the memorial will be a plain stainless steel structure. Mr. Larson reviewed heights of various adjacent structures, including the Historic Courthouse cupola, the Cub Foods entry, and the numerous church steeples. He also explained why the height is necessary to accomplish the desired design effect. Mr. Larson noted that many of the adjacent trees are 35-40 feet high, and the feeling was that the memorial ought to have some sort of presence above the trees. Mrs. Bealka pointed out that Master Gardeners would be helpful for ideas for vegetation that might grow on the structure. Mr. Middleton asked about the meeting with neighbors. Mr. Larson stated the meeting was not well attended, but said Gudrun Nordby of the Historic Courthouse and Dick Kilty, Oak and Fourth streets, both favored the design. One neighbor, who resides on Fourth Street directly across from the Riverview parking lot, was present and stated she likes the proposed design. Mr. Middleton stated he, too, is concerned about the height. Mr. Zoller, seconded by Mr. Wald, moved approval as conditioned, with the additional condition that the memorial be a maximum of 80 feet in height. Motion passed 6-2, with Mr. Ranum and • Mr. Middleton voting no. 3 City of Stillwater Planning Commission August 13, 2001 Other business: • Fence Ordinance revisions - Ordinances from eight other municipalities were included for members to review. Mr. Ranum talked of the importance of sight triangles and setbacks on corner properties. There also was discussion of Stillwater's requirement to have a fence one foot off the property line and whether such a requirement was needed or useful for maintenance purposes. Mr. Zoller, seconded by Mr. Wald, moved to change the ordinance to allow fences to be placed on the property line. • Comprehensive Plan - Discussion of Chapter 3 was postponed until the September meeting. • Mr. Ranum asked for clarification of the Conflict of Interest definitions. Mr. Ranum, seconded by Mr. Teske, moved to adjourn at 9:25 p.m.; all in favor. Respectfully submitted, Sharon Baker Recording Secretary 0 0 4