Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-09-10 CPC MIN• City of Stillwater Planning Commission September 10, 2001 Present: Russ Hultman, chairperson Glenna Bealka, Dave Middleton, Dave Peroceschi, Karl Ranum, Paul Teske Darwin Wald and Terry Zoller Others: Community Development Director Steve Russell Absent: Robert Gag Mr. Hultman called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. Approval of minutes: Mr. Wald, seconded by Mr. Ranum, moved approval of the minutes of Aug. 13, 2001, as presented; motion passed unanimously. Case No. SUP/01-40 A special use permit for a Type II Home Occupation Permit at 2360 Walnut Creek Dr. in the RA, Single Family Residential District. Ron and Patty Johnson, applicants. The applicants were present. Mrs. Johnson explained their house is the first on the block and her hair dressing business would be non-intrusive to the neighborhood. She also stated the neighbors were supportive of the proposal. Mr. Middleton asked if appointments would be scheduled so as to not overlap; Mrs. Johnson responded in the affirmative. Mr. Ranum, seconded by Mr. Wald, moved approval as conditioned. Motion passed unanimously. Case No. V/01-41 A variance to the rear yard setback (25 feet required, 0 feet requested) for construction of a single family residence at 1511 N. Main St. in the RB, Two Family Residential District and the Bluffland/Shoreland District. John Hoeschler, representing Elayne Aiple, applicant. It was noted that no action would be taken on this case at the September meeting, the item will be on the Oct. 8 agenda. However, Mr. Hoeschler asked for the Commission's input. Mr. Hoeschler stated that Ms. Aiple owns 3/4 mile of riverfront, with her home located on the northern 2/3 of the property. He stated there is a buyer interested in purchasing a portion o the property if he can build a single-family house on the parcel. He noted that with the required 100-feet setback from the river and the 25-foot rear setback, it would be impossible to build a single-family residence without a variance. He noted the property is not located in a residential neighborhood. Regarding impact on surrounding properties, he noted the marina goes right back to the rear property line and the clubhouse right to the front line, and directly to the east is the Zephyr train. He further suggested that under current zoning, RB, the applicant could built two houses connected by a big breezeway. r? ?LJ • City of Stillwater Planning Commission September 10, 2001 Mr. Ranum indicated he did not find any reasonable argument for granting a variance. Mr. Zoller stated he has never been in favor of a 0 variance for safety reasons. Mr. Middleton spoke in favor, stating that granting a variance would have minimal impact on neighboring properties. Mr. Russell pointed that that in the expansion area, the setback from the railroad tracks is 75 feet, and he suggested that there might be complaints later if the Zephyr property changes hands and the property is put to another use, possibly commercial. Mr. Ranum, seconded by Mr. Zoller, moved to close the matter to public comment; motion passed unanimously.. Mr. Hultman, seconded by Mr. Ranum, moved to table this case until the Oct. 8 meeting; motion passed unanimously. Case No. SUP/01-42 A special use permit for Oakridge Community Church for a K-12 Christian Day School at 6950 Stillwater Blvd. in the RA, Single Family Residential District. Richard Bernier, applicant. Present were Richard Bernier, representing Oakridge Church, and DeJ DeJong, representing the K-12 school. Mr. DeJong stated the school currently has 38 students; there is no busing of students. He noted that Oakridge Church previously has served as a District 834 Adventure Club • site for 25-30 children. He said his proposal to locate the school in the church would not require any modifications to the structure, and there would be no signage. Mr. Zoller asked about recess; Mr. DeJong said the proposal is to use the existing play area at the church, and stated the children would be highly supervised during the outside time. The resident of 2209 Oakridge Road presented a petition of neighboring property owners opposed to the use. He stated there is too much activity and on-going problems with noise, dust, litter, and trespassing association with sporting events held at the church's athletic fields. He stated the area is zoned single-family and neighbors want it to remain that way. Harry Klassen, 2127 Oakridge Road, addressed the Commission. He showed a number of photos of the church property and charged that the church is out of compliance with several city ordinances, specifically there is an unpaved parking lot and the garbage dumpster is not enclosed. He, too, spoke on ongoing problems with the use of the fields, including a problem with the batting cage. He suggested the church should get the property in order before this request is considered. He also spoke of existing traffic problems on County Road 5. Also speaking in opposition was the resident of 2340 Driftwood who stated he was opposed to the school due to its association with the church. Neighbors have never had a good relationship with the church, he stated. Linda Ashworth, 2213 Oakridge, a neighboring property owner who has two children attending • the school in question, stated the use of the athletic fields has been a nuisance at times, but she 2 City of Stillwater Planning Commission September 10, 2001 also suggested the fields are a great service to the community. While there are issues that need to be resolved, she said the school use of the church is a reasonable use. Tim Ashworth spoke of the positive impact of ballgames and also suggested that those issues are separate from the school use proposal. Mark Pominville, 2324 Driftwood Lane, said he had not experienced a lot of problems in the past, but questioned whether the school use might involve building expansion at some point in the future. Sharon Teat, 2109 Dundee Place, said her biggest concern is adding more traffic to County Road 5. Mr. Peroceschi asked how long the school might remain at Oakridge Church. Mr. DeJong said he was not sure, noting that the school has no association with the church. Mr. Peroceschi noted that other than a concern with traffic, neighbors appear to be more concerned with previous problems with the church than with the school use proposal. Mr. Ranum asked if the traffic issue had been addressed at all. Mr. Russell stated no specific consideration had been giving to the potential for additional traffic, but the city could check with Washington County. • Mr. Middleton asked if there was anything the Commission could do to help neighbors rectify the issues. Mr. Russell pointed out that several years ago neighbors presented a petition asking for some changes in the ball fields. Mr. Russell said the Commission could make conformance with zoning ordinances part of the conditions of approval; the use also could be subject to a one- year review, he noted. Mr. Zoller asked why the school request was presented so late. Mr. DeJong said because of School District 834's previous use of the church facility, he assumed the school use was already approved. In moving to deny the Special Use Permit, Mr. Zoller noted it was unfortunate the school use was tied to the ongoing problems neighbors have with the church and ball fields, problems that should have been addressed before this request was presented. Mr. Wald seconded the motion for denial. Motion passed 7-1, with Mr. Peroceschi voting against. Case No. SUP/01-43 A special use permit for a martial arts/dance school with one office at 215 N. Williams St. in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Sara Gilberg, applicant. Present were Ms. Gilberg and Timothy Quarberg, the proposed building tenant. Gary Starns, one of the immediate neighbors, stated the area is a quiet residential neighborhood. Currently, one business operates from the location, and Mr. Starns said he is opposed to the addition of two more businesses. He spoke of potential problems with additional traffic, noise levels, the type of clientele that might be frequenting the new business. He also showed photos • indicating that the Gilbergs are not respecting the no-parking line and hours of operation agreed . City of Stillwater Planning Commission September 10, 2001 upon when neighbors came before the City Council for relief from problems with the previous tenant, the Valley Co-op. Mary Starns said there are not 28 parking spaces as indicated in the request documentation, and she said she wants the laws - no-parking space and hours of operation - enforced. Mr. Quarberg stated that there may or may not be a dance school. His wife might operate the dance school which would be a spirituality motion class for adults; the music is not at all objectionable, he said. He also stated that initially, he planned to offer martial arts classes three evenings a week, but would like the opportunity to offer more classes if the business grows. He further noted that it would be highly unlikely that all clients would drive and park their cars in the lot so the existing parking is sufficient for his needs. Regarding the number of parking spaces, Ms. Gilberg said that information came from the appraiser when she and her husband purchased the property. Ms. Gilberg agreed that there was one incident with they had to move their business vehicles before the 7 a.m. start time due to an emergency situation, and she apologized for that incident. Mr. Ranum asked if there was an overall Special Use Permit for the building, to which Mr. Russell responded in the affirmative. Mr. Ranum suggested the request is an opportunity to • revise the conditions of the SUP, for example, tying the size of a class to the parking requirements. He also suggested that consideration might be given to restricting the hours of operation in a residential neighborhood. Mr. Ranum moved to continue the request pending review of the Special Use Permit for the entire building in relation to on-site parking and delivery issues, an assessment of available parking and hours of operation in a residential neighborhood. Mr. Zoller seconded the motion, but noted that what is being proposed is probably one of the best uses for the neighborhood. Motion to continue passed unanimously. Case No. V/01-44 A variance to the side yard setback (25 feet required, 14 feet requested) for construction of a two-story addition at 120 W. Wilkins St. in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Mark Balay, presenting Tom and Sherry Armstrong, applicant. Mr. Balay provided a full size drawing of the plans. He noted the drainage will remain on site and the addition will follow the architectural style of the existing house, both conditions of approval. Mr. Zoller, seconded by Mr. Peroceschi, moved approval as conditioned; motion passed unanimously. • 4 City of Stillwater Planning Commission September 10, 2001 Case No. V/01-45 A variance to the side yard setback (10 feet required, 2 feet requested) for construction of an attached 2-car garage at 726 Seventh St. S. in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Daniel and Maria Poliszuk, applicants. The applicants were present. They noted that they had been granted a variance earlier, but a survey indicated that the assumed property line was incorrect and the proposed garage will be two feet from the property line. They stated the affected neighbor at 722 S. Seventh St. has no problem with their plans. Mr. Middleton, seconded by Mrs. Bealka, moved approval as conditioned; motion passed unanimously. Case No. V/01-46 A variance to the front yard setback (30 feet required, 25 feet requested) for construction of a porch at 1003 Fifth St. N. in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Todd Sharkey, applicant. Mr. Sharkey was present. He pointed out that the house across the street is closer to the property line that his requested porch will be. • Mr. Ranum, seconded by Mr. Wald, moved approval as conditioned. Motion passed 7-1, with Mr. Wald voting no. Case No. ANN/01-02 A request for annexation of 2.5 acres of land at 8160 Neal Ave. in the AP, Agricultural Preservation District. Greg Johnson, Manchester Homes, representing John and Rebecca Choiniere, applicant. Case No. ZAM/01-04 A zoning map amendment to rezone 2.5 acres of land from AP to RA, Single Family Residential at 8160 Neal Ave. Greg Johnson, Manchester Homes, representing John and Rebecca Choiniere, applicant. Case No. SUB/01-47 A subdivision of a 2.5 acre lot into four lots at 8160 Neal Ave. Greg Johnson, Manchester Homes, representing John and Rebecca Choiniere, applicant. Greg Johnson was presented, noting that the property in question is surrounded on three sides by the city. Mr. Zoller pointed out that this request is exactly how ghost platting is supposed to work, commending the Township for having the foresight to plat in this manner. The property is being subdivided into four lots, and Mr. Ranum asked if all lots were in compliance with zoning requirements; Mr. Johnson and Mr. Russell responded in the affirmative. Mr. Middleton, seconded by Mr. Wald, moved approval of Case No. ANN/01-02; motion passed unanimously. • 5 • City of Stillwater Planning Commission September 10, 2001 Mr. Middleton,. seconded by Mr. Ranum, moved approval of Case No. ZAM/01-04; motion passed unanimously. Mr. Middleton, seconded by Mr. Wald, moved approval of Case No. SUB/01-47 as conditioned; motion passed unanimously. Case No. V/01-48 A variance to the front yard setback (30 feet required, 13 feet requested) for construction of a porch at 504 W. Hickory St. in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Jeff Velin, applicant. Mr. Velin was present. The variance had previously been granted, but two years had lapsed. The applicant was unaware that construction had to begin within two years of approval. Mrs. Bealka, seconded by Mr. Wald, moved approval as conditioned; motion passed unanimously. Other items: • A representative of Northern Vineyards was presented. He said he thought a request to construct a deck was coming before the Planning Commission. He was informed the Heritage Preservation Commission had reviewed and approved plans, and that a variance was not needed. Mr. Hultman asked why the plans hadn't come before the Planning Commission; Mr. Russell stated the deck was part of the original plans. • Mr. Ranum asked if there is a review process in place for compliance with city ordinance, for example enclosure of dumpsters. There was a brief discussion of some problems with dumpsters in the downtown area. • Fence Ordinance revisions - Mr. Ranum, seconded by Mr. Wald, moved to continue this matter until the October meeting. Mr. Wald, seconded by Mr. Teske, moved to adjourn at 10:05 p.m.; all in favor. Respectfully submitted, Sharon Baker Recording Secretary 6