Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-03-13 CPC MINCity of Stillwater Planning Commission March 13, 2006 Present: Robert Gag, chairperson, Suzanne Block, Gregg Carlsen, Mike Dahlquist, Brad Meinke, Dave Middleton, David Peroceschi and Paul Teske Others: Interim Community Development Director Robert Lockyear Absent: David Junker Mr. Gag called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. Approval of minutes: Mr. Dahlquist, seconded by Ms. Block, moved approval of the minutes of Feb. 13, 2006, as submitted. Motion passed unanimously. Case No. ZAM/06-01 Zoning Map amendment changing the zoning designation from Agriculture Preservation, AP, to TH, Townhouse, on 25.3 acres of land, Millbrook Development, located south of TH 96, west of Neal Avenue, north of Brown's Creek and east of Manning Avenue. US Homes, applicant. Case No. ZAM/06-02 Zoning Map amendment changing the zoning designation from Agricultural Preservation to CR, Cottage Residential, on 69.9 acres of land, Millbrook Development. US Homes, applicant. Case No. ZAM/06-03 Zoning Map Amendment changing the zoning designation from Agricultural Preservation to TR, Traditional Residential, on 72.7 acres of land, Millbrook Development. US Homes, applicant. Case No. PUD/06-07 Planning Unit Development for a 270-lot development on 132+/- acres of land located south of TH 96, west of Neal Avenue, north of Brown's Creek and east of Manning Avenue, Millbrook Development, in the TH, Townhouse, CR, Cottage Residential, and TR, Traditional Residential District. US Homes, applicant. Case No. SUB/06-06 Preliminary plat approval for a 270-lot development, Millbrook Development. US Homes, applicant. Case No. ANN/06-01 Annexation of 132+/- acres of land located, Millbrook Development, located south of TH 96, west of Neal Avenue, north of Brown's Creek and east of Manning Avenue. US Homes, applicant. Representing the developer were Phil Carlson, Jay Liberacki and Dan Schmidt. Mr. Carlson reviewed staff comments/recommendations. Regarding Mr. Lockyear's comments regarding installation of parks and trails as part of phase 1, Mr. Carlson said the developer did not plan to install all parks and all trails in phase 1. Regarding access to Brown's Creek near lot 149, Mr. Carlson said it is their position that the access is wide enough and meets the spirit of the provision of open space/access. Regarding the requirement that all trails be bituminous surface, Mr. Carlson said that position puts the City in conflict with the Watershed District, which does not favor bituminous surface in close proximity to Brown's Creek or South Twin Lake. Mr. Lockyear reiterated his concern regarding the provision of a phasing plan and the provision of trails/parkland in phase 1. Mr. Lockyear also noted that the City Council and Parks Board have made it clear that trails will be surfaced. There was discussion about the access to Brown's Creek at the area in question, as well as questions regarding the availability of parking in the area and landscaping of the access point. Mr. Liberacki suggested that the majority of users at • that access point would be residents, rather than visitors who would most likely access the trail City of Stillwater Planning Comm i fission March 13, 2006 system from points near the parks areas. Also, Mr. Liberacki said the plans to construct the roundabout in the area minimize the need for an enlarged access at that point. Regarding Mr. Eckles' comments, Mr. Carlson said the developer is in fact meeting the City's required 10 percent parkland dedication; Mr. Lockyear said staff agrees with that assessment. Regarding the provision of outlots versus easements at trail access corridors, Mr. Carlson said the developer would prefer to grant easements near the smaller trail access corridors, rather than outlots. Regarding the provision of a wetland mitigation site along lots 167-172, Mr. Carlson said the developer does not necessarily agree that 167-172 is the best area to locate the mitigation area; Mr. Liberacki said the engineering consultant, Peterson Environmental, thinks there is more flexibility towards the east end of the project. Mr. Gag said it seems there are many unresolved issues remaining. Mr. Teske agreed that unresolved issues, such as the location of the wetlands mitigation area, does not seem to be consistent with granting the PUD approval. Mr. Liberacki said the developer had hoped all the issues would be resolved, but agreed that perhaps they should come back in 30 days. Mr. Lockyear said the major issues are the ones listed in his memo - phasing plan, access to Brown's Creek and trail surfacing; technical issues, he said, can be ironed out by staff. Mr. Teske said the Creek access as proposed doesn't seem open or accessible. Mr. Gag opened the public hearing Ruth Bruns, 8790 Neal Ave., expressed a concern about the maintenance of the trail system, to ensure that the trails are cleaned up. Mr. Lockyear said the City would be responsible for maintenance of public trails. Ms. Block questioned why public access to South Twin Lake is not provided. No other comments were received and the hearing was closed. Regarding the phasing issue, Mr. Peroceschi said he did not see the need for trails in phase 1. Mr. Lockyear said the issue is whether the Planning Commission thinks it is appropriate to require a phasing of the trail system. Mr. Teske said he would favor trails in phase 1 to connect residents as soon as possible. Mr. Liberacki noted these trails would be very expensive to construct. Mr. Gag pointed out that it is City policy to require developers to pay for and install trails. The decision was made to table the dicsussion, with the developer to return with more firm plans after addition meetings with staff. Mr. Lockyear noted for the record that the developer waived the 60-day rule right of review; Mr. Liberacki affirmed that. Other items: Annual review of Linder's Flower Mart and CUB Foods Special Use Permit for outdoor greenhouse sales - Mr. Teske noted that the City has all kinds of stringent guidelines regulating setbacks/aesthetics pertaining to potential developers who want to do business here or build here, yet the City allows people from outside the community to put up tents to make money. He • suggested that allowing such tents to be put up on a seasonal basis undermines all the efforts made to maintain the desired character of the City. Mr. Teske noted that there are local City of Stillwater Planning Commission March 13, 2006 businesses, paying property taxes and abiding by all the regulations, that provide the same services/products, and he suggested that allowing the temporary use puts a burden on the local businesses. Ms. Block asked about the fee for a Special Use Permit and suggested that perhaps the fee should be based on length of time, rather than a flat fee. Mr. Teske said his point primarily has to do with aesthetics, again referring to the intense review that developers must go through. Mr. Dahlquist pointed out that the owners' of the mail like the use for the business it draws. However, Mr. Dahlquist pointed out that the City library is temporarily located at Valley Ridge Mall, which may result in a parking issue. Mr. Middleton noted the permit does include a provision that parking problems is grounds for revoking the permit. Mr. Middleton said he also would like to look at the issue of how many signs are allowed on the tent. It also was suggested that the tent could be placed in a different location to alleviate potential parking concerns. Mr. Middleton moved to approve the Linder's permit, with the condition that the number of signs be limited to two and that the tent be shifted to the southwest corner of the parking lot. Mr. Middleton also suggested that members drive by during the sales operation to determine if parking is a problem for consideration during next year's review. Mr. Peroceschi seconded the motion; motion failed on a 4-4 vote, with Commissioners Teske, Dahlquist, Gag and Block voting no. Mr. Gag said he would prefer allowing just one sign. Ms. Block said she would like the permit fee to be based on profit or length of time to be more comparable with what local businesses pay. Mr. Middleton noted the vendor pays for use of the lot; the money goes to the Mall Association for marketing, etc. Mr. Lockyear noted that the sales use is scheduled to begin in April and perhaps the Commission could implement additional regulations for the next review. Mr. Meinke suggested working on the issue so the applicants have a clear understanding of the issues/position for next year. Ms. Block moved to reconsider Mr. Middleton's motion based on the understanding that before next year, the Commission review the issues involved in the use. Mr. Middleton seconded the motion; motion passed 5-3. Mr. Middleton moved to approve the special use permit for Linder's Flower Mart as conditioned with the additional conditions that signage be limited to two 2x4 signs, with the tent to be placed in the southwest corner of the lot. Mr. Peroceschi seconded the motion. Motion passed 6-2, with Mr. Dahlquist and Mr. Teske opposed. Mr. Middleton moved to approve the SUP for Cub Foods/Baileys with the same four conditions of approval and the additional condition relating to signage. Mr. Peroceschi seconded the motion. Motion passed 6-2, with Mr. Dahlquist and Mr. Teske opposed. Annual review of Andiamo Special Use Permit and Wharfage Permit for the Gondola on the St. Croix - Mr. Middleton asked if any complaints had been received. Mr. Lockyear said he had checked with the Police Department. He said the only complaints received were in regard to the "booze cruise" when officers have to be on-hand during docking. Other than that, the Department indicated no problems with the operation, he said. Mr. Lockyear said there are some complaints about music from people living on the bluff. It was noted that music on the dock is not allowed past 10 p.m. Mr. Middleton spoke of the visitors and business the boats generate and moved to renew the Special Use Permit for St. Croix Boat and Packet and the Gondola on the St. Croix. Ms. Block seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. City of Stillwater Planning Commission March 13, 2006 Mr. Lockyear briefed the Commission on the meeting regarding the proposed height regulations for the Downtown District. He said VCR copies are available. The options for the Commission are to deny any changes to the height regulations, direct staff to refine the regulations, forward the proposal to the City Council without a recommendation or approve the height regulations as proposed. Mr. Lockyear noted the new Community Development Director was scheduled to come onboard in the next several days. Mr. Gag asked if other Commission members who had attended the public meeting were swayed by any public comments. Mr. Carlsen said he was surprised by how few business owners were in attendance; Mr. Lockyear pointed out that every business owner in the Downtown District had received notice of the meeting. It was noted that many people spoke in favor of the proposed regulations and about five spoke in favor of stronger regulations. Mr. Lockyear reviewed 3D photos of the area that was provided for the meeting. Mr. Lockyear said the Commission could wait until the new Community Development Director is onboard or take some initiative and visit some areas that have had their downtown developed or instruct staff to do some videos of such areas. Also, Mr. Lockyear said taking some photos from a pedestrian point of view would be good to do. He said while there is time to consider the various issues, there is, in fact, interest in putting up tall buildings at this point. Mr. Teske said the people attending the meeting expressed their desire to preserve the character of the downtown in regulating heights. Mr. Meinke spoke in favor of being more restrictive in heights. Mr. Teske said he was ready to move forward with the proposed height regulations. Ms. Block spoke in favor of not allowing any additional buildings in the 20' area, except for the existing buildings; Mr. Gag pointed out that might limit things the City could do if it received the flood wall funding. Mr. Lockyear suggested a revision to the map. Paul Teske moved for approval of the Central Business District height regulations, with one amendment - extending the 1.5-story, 20' regulations to include plots 422. Mr. Dahlquist seconded the motion. Motion passed 6-2, with Mr. Middleton and Mr. Peroceschi opposed. On a motion by Ms. Block, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sharon Baker Recording Secretary 0