Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-11-10 CPC MINCity of Stillwater Planning Commission November 10, 2003 Present: Robert Gag, Chair, Mike Dahlquist, David Junker, David Middleton, David Peroceschi, Paul Teske and Jerry Turnquist Others: Community Development Director Steve Russell Absent: Karl Ranum and Darwin Wald Mr. Gag called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. Approval of Minutes: Mr. Junker, seconded by Mr. Turnquist, moved approval of the minutes of October 13, 2003. Mr. Dahlquist noted that he had not moved approval of the September 8, 2003 minutes as indicated. Mr. Turnquist said it was likely he who had made that motion. Motion to approve the October 13, 2003 minutes as amended passed unanimously. Case No. V/03-90. A variance to the street setback (30 feet required, 13 feet requested), accessory building size (120 square feet allowed, 508 square feet proposed) for a second garage at 2440 Bayberry Ave. in the RA, Single Family Residential District. Joe Fisher, applicant. Mr. Fisher was present. He said his backyard abuts County Road 12, and he never thought setback would be an issue. He said he is proposing an additional garage and attached shed because the location of utilities and a neighbor's deck made it difficult to do an addition to the existing garage. He said the new structure would be used for storage only. It was noted the applicant's proposal requires three variances - for setback, a second accessory building and size of the accessory building. Mr. Middleton noted that the Planning Commission's position has been to deny garages as a second accessory building. Mr. Teske said he was concerned about the impact of the proposal on the character of the neighborhood, suggesting that the magnitude of the proposal is almost commercial in nature. Mr. Teske moved to deny Case V/03-90. Mr. Middleton seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Case No. V/BM/03-91 The applicant was not present and later indicated to Mr. Russell in a telephone call that he was no longer interested in pursuing the request. Mr. Middleton moved to deny the case based on the fact there was no response from the applicant. Mr. Peroceschi seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Case No. V/03-92 A variance to the street setback (30 feet required, 17 feet requested) for construction of an enclosed stairway to the basement at 523 W. Moore St. in the RB, Two 40 Family Residential District. Erica Flutz, applicant. 1 City of Stillwater Planning Commission November 10, 2003 Mr. Flutz was present. The agenda item indicated an additional request for a variance for a front porch; that project has already been completed. Ms. Flutz explained that the original access to the basement has been closed off due to a mold issue. The new, exterior entrance would be done in cinder block with a metal door, just above surface level, enclosing the entry. The entry would be landscaped with shrubs. Mr. Middleton noted the property is on a corner lot, which can create a hardship for meeting setbacks. Mr. Junker, seconded by Mr. Teske, moved approval as conditioned. Motion passed 6- 0, with Mr. Peroceschi abstaining. Case No. V/03-93 A variance to the side yard setback (10 feet required, 1 foot requested) for construction of a 3-season porch, mudroom, tool shed, basement entry and replacement deck (partially completed) at 107 N. Owens St. in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Jeffrey S. Kartak, applicant. Mr. Kartak was present. He said he has owned the property for seven years and is trying to make improvements. He said he has replaced the windows. He explained that a drainage problem under the deck prompted him to dig footings to get the water away from the foundation, and he started building. Dave Froehner, neighbor to the north, said the applicant told him about his plans, and he (Froehner) suggesting installing gutters to avid drainage problems. Mr. Froehner was not opposed to the plans. Mr. Junker suggested that there should be some ramification for beginning work on a project of this scope without obtaining a permit. Mr. Middleton noted that the size of the lot , 35' x 126' feet, creates a hardship for meeting the setback. He suggested adding a condition regarding installation of gutters. Mr. Teske noted the house is already out of compliance. He agreed that there should be some ramification of proceeding without a permit and said if the applicant had come before the Commission prior to beginning construction, the plans likely would have been denied. However, he said at this point, he can understand why the applicant aligned the structure with the property line. He said he would reluctantly move approval as conditioned, with the additional condition that gutters be installed on the north side of the building. Mr. Tumquist seconded the motion. 2 City of Stillwater Planning Commission November 10, 2003 Mr. Junker asked the applicant about the timeframe for completion. The applicant responded he wold get the outside completed as soon as the footings are inspected. There also was some discussion as to whether the applicant would try to match the exterior of the original building or do all new siding. Motion to approve passed unanimously. Case No. SUP/03-94 A request for modification of a special permit for additional services at St. Croix Valley Life Care Center at 713 County Road 5 in the RA, Single Family Residential District. Nancy Kiolbasa, applicant. The applicant was present. The Center currently provides counseling services. The request is to add pregnancy testing and STD testing and limited ultrasound testing. Mr. Teske asked if the additional services would change the Center's client use. Ms. Kiolbasa said the intent was to serve the existing clients better. She said hours would not change, but they may need to be a bit more flexible in order to provide the new services. Mr. Middleton asked if annual review is a condition of the SUP. Mr. Russell said review is upon complaint. Mr. Junker moved approval as conditioned. Mr. Teske seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Case No. SUB/03-96 A subdivision of two existing lots (15,000 square feet each) into two lots of 22,500 square feet and 7,500 square feet at 921 North Second St. in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Jim Russell, applicant. Mr. Russell said he realized the steep slopes of the property restrict use. He said he has no building plans at this time; the intent is to legally describe the upper tract. Kathy Baker, 1007 N. Second St., a neighboring property owner, was present for the discussion, but did not comment. Mr. Middleton noted that the new, lower lot has less than 6,000 square feet of buildable space when the slopes are excluded. The applicant suggested that something might be able to be built there in the future. Mr. Dahlquist said he was concerned with creating a lot that would require a variance in the future. Mr. Junker agreed that the slopes are too steep and approving the request would create a lot that isn't usable. 3 City of Stillwater Planning Commission November 10, 2003 Mr. Junker moved to deny Case SUB/03-96. Mr. Dahlquist seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Case No. SUB/V/03-97 A subdivision of a 10,800 square foot lot occupied by a duplex into two substandard lots of 5,400 square feet each (7,500 square feet required for single family residence) at 1002 Sixth Ave. S. in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Tony Lodge, applicant. Mr. Lodge was present. He explained that the existing structure, although described as a duplex, has been converted to a single-family residence. He said he felt that constructing another small house on the property would "serve the community better than a poorly designed duplex." The resident of 1010 Sixth Ave. S. expressed a concern about the possible impact on property values and the proximity of an additional structure to her house. The resident of 1009 S. Sixth Ave. also expressed a concern about the impact on property values. Steve Russell noted he had received three calls all concerned about the request. Mr. Peroceschi noted that a variance would be required to put a house on the newly-formed lot. Mr. Middleton pointed out that all the houses in the area are built on lots with 40' street frontage. Mr. Teske suggested that the proposal may be consistent with the neighborhood, but not necessarily desirable. Mr. Junker and Mr. Gag felt the lots would be too small for two single-family houses Mr. Junker, seconded by Mr. Teske, moved to deny Case No. SUB/V/03-97. Motion passed unanimously. Case No. V/03-95 A variance to the sign regulations at 601 N. Main St. in the CBD, Central Business District. Todd Weiss, applicant. Mr. Russell said the applicant had called and would be unable to attend the meeting because of an accident. Mr. Teske, seconded by Mr. Middleton, moved to continue the case; motion passed unanimously. Case No. CPA/03-01 Downtown Plan update for area bounded by Myrtle, Mulberry, Main Streets and the St. Croix River designating park land, flood protection location, parking, trail and pedestrian corridor between Main Street and the St. Croix River. City of Stillwater, applicant. Mr. Russell briefly reviewed four alternative plans that have been considered by planning consultants, various city commissions and Downtown Plan Coordinating Committee. Option D is the recommended alternative. Plan D, he said, provides for a strong connection from Main Street 4 City of Stillwater Planning Commis Sion November 10, 2003 to the river; a linear trail link, potential site for a visitors' center/public rest rooms; increased Lowell Park acreage; flood protection alternative alignment. The plan moves a proposed parking structure away from the river to the slope of Second Street. Mr. Junker noted that a log of diverse groups and interests have been involved in looking at alternatives. Plan D, he said, represents a good comprise. Mr. Junker moved to recommend the Plan D concept. Mr. Teske seconded the motion. Mr. Dahlquist asked about flood control structures/elevations. Mr. Russell said feasibility studies will further define the type of flood structure and locations. Motion to approve Plan D, in concept, passed unanimously. Other Items: Mr. Russell noted that developers of the Arbours have appealed the Planning Commission's denial to the City Council. The developers have eliminated the penthouse and one story from their plans to stay within the 50' maximum building height requirement. Mr. Russell said Commission Member Karl Ranum has challenged the legality of the revised plans going before the Council; Mr. Ranum is of the opinion that the new plans should come back to the Planning Commission. Mr. Russell asked whether the Commission would like an opinion on the issue from City Attorney David Magnuson. The consensus was to request an opinion - five in favor; Mr. Middleton and Mr. Peroceschi disagreed. Mr. Russell reminded members of the Nov. 17 special meeting regarding the Boutwell Area transportation study. Mr. Turnquist, seconded by Mr. Junker, moved to adjourn at 9 p.m.; all in favor. Respectfully submitted, Sharon Baker Recording Secretary 5