Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-07-10 CPC MINCity of Stillwater Planning Commission July 10, 2006 Present: Robert Gag, chairperson, Suzanne Block, Gregg Carlsen, Mike Dahlquist, David Junker (8:20 p.m.), Brad Meinke, Dave Middleton, David Peroceschi, and Paul Teske Others: Community Development Director Bill Turnblad and Planner Mike Pogge Mr. Gag called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. Approval of minutes: Mr. Dahlquist, seconded by Mr. Teske, moved approval of the minutes of June 12, 2006, as presented. Motion passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. PUD/SUB/ZAM/06-16. This case was continued until the August meeting. Case No. V/06-21 A variance to the street yard setback (20 feet required, 0 feet requested) for construction of a single-car garage at 923 W. Maple St. in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Roberta Pugsley, applicant. The applicant was present. Mr. Pogge reviewed the staff report that concluded with the recommendation for approval with two conditions. Mr. Gag opened the public hearing. No comments were received, and the hearing was closed. Mr. Carlsen asked whether the garage would have the same roof pitch as the main residence. Ms. Pugsley responded that the property is for sale. Mr. Peroceschi asked if the variance request was initiated to make the property more saleable. Ms. Pugsley responded in the affirmative, but said if she does retain ownership she will build a garage. Mr. Middleton moved approval as conditioned; Mr. Meinke seconded the motion. Mr. Dahlquist suggested adding a third condition that the roof pitch matches the main structure. Mr. Middleton and Mr. Meinke agreed to add that condition to the motion of approval. Amended motion passed unanimously. Case SUB/V/06-25 A resubdivision of two lots at 1802 Fourth St. N. and 206 W. Poplar and a variance to the lot size regulations to create a lot in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Scott Junker applicant. Scott Junker was present. Mr. Turnblad reviewed the staff report. It was noted that the proposed resubdivision could result in three lots, all of which meet the minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. However, that arrangement would result in a "bizarre" configuration of lot lines. It was the staff recommendation to grant the requested variance for lot C, allowing that lot to be 9,400 square feet, in order to create a more coherent lot line arrangement. No comments were received when the hearing was opened. Mr. Peroceschi asked if a survey had been completed. Mr. Turnblad noted that if the resubdivision is approved, a survey will have to be completed for deeds and platting. Mr. Middleton suggested adding a condition that lot B be a minimum of 10,000 square feet. Mr. Dahlquist noted that if a deck is placed on the north side is of Scott Junker's existing house, another variance would be required. Scott Junker said he City of Stillwater Planning Comm ission y , Jul 10 2006 would be comfortable with adding a condition that no variance will be granted for lot C. Mr. Dahlquist noted that there is a way to subdivide the properties without a variance, but that creates a worse situation in respect to lot configuration in explaining his support for the variance request. Mr. Teske moved approval as conditioned, with the additional conditions that lot B be a minimum of 10,000 square feet and that no variance will be granted for lot C. Mr. Middleton seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. (David Junker was not present for this vote.) Case No. V/06-28 A variance to allow 28 percent of the lot area to be covered in buildings in excess of the allowable 25 percent and a variance to allow the total ground coverage of the accessory building to exceed the ground area coverage of the principal building at 515 N. Everett St. in the RB, Two Family Residential District. John and Kim Brach, applicants. Mr. Brach was present. Mr. Turnblad reviewed the staff report. The applicant is planning to construct a garage and two future additions. It was noted there is an historic shed on the property that is over 50 years old. Mr. Turnblad said staff would recommend the variance to lot coverage and size of accessory structure to construct the garage and preserve the existing shed. Staff also was comfortable with the proposed setback from the ravine, Mr. Turnblad said. However, he said staff could not support plans for a second future addition to the house. Mr. Middleton asked what the Heritage Preservation Commission might do regarding the existing shed. Mr. Turnblad said the HPC would likely require the shed to be moved if a variance was not granted, but would not allow the shed to be demolished. Mr. Brach pointed out that his plans had changed somewhat from what was included in the staff report. He said one of the planned future addition will now be 50 square feet, smaller that what was previously planned and listed in the staff report. In addition, he said the garage has been downsized somewhat and is now planned to be 22x22, rather than 22x 23.5. The changes would result in 1,730 square feet of building coverage when the proposed additions are completed, rather than 1,853 square feet of building coverage as noted in the staff report. Mr. Teske, seconded by Mr. Dahlquist, moved to continue the case until the applicant provides firm figures regarding building square footage. Motion passed unanimously. Case No. V/06-29 A variance to the rear yard setback (25 feet required, 15 feet requested) for construction of a deck at 1331 Macey Court in the CCR, Cottage Cove Residential District. Scott and Jennifer Shutes, applicants. Mr. Pogge reviewed the request and staff report. Ms. Block asked Mr. Pogge if he had any observations regarding the CCR District. Mr. Pogge said he thought constructing future decks could be an issue with about 20 percent of the lots in the CCR District, and he suggested that it might be appropriate for the Commission to consider a zoning text amendment rather than numerous individual lot variances. He noted that in this instance granting a variance would not be detrimental to other properties as the lot abuts a park. 0 July 10, 2006 No comments were received when the hearing was opened. The applicants noted that their neighbors had been contacted and none objected to their plans. The homeowners association also approved the plans, they said. Mr. Carlsen said he would feel more comfortable considering a text amendment rather than individual requests. It was noted that preparing a text amendment could take 6-8 weeks. Eric Thole, 1211 Macey Way, also present for a variance request related to construction of a deck, asked that this case and his request be decided on their merits and then consider a text amendment, if the Commission feels that is appropriate. Mr. Thole also pointed out that in this phase of the Settler's Glen development there are not many lots that might require similar variances. Mr. Middleton agreed that the two requests before the Commission should be considered first and then look at a possible text amendment. Mr. Middleton moved to approve Case No. V/06-29 as conditioned. Mr. Teske seconded the motion. Mr. Dahlquist agreed the Commission should look at a possible text amendment but noted that an amendment, if passed, might not match what is being granted here. Mr. Dahlquist also pointed out there is a way for a deck to be constructed without a variance. Mr. Teske called the question. Motion passed 7-1, with Mr. Dahlquist voting no and Mr. Junker absent. Case No. V/06-30 A variance request to the rear yard setback (25 feet required, 18 feet requested) for construction of a deck at 1211 Macey Way in the CCR, Cottage Cove Residential District. Eric and Amy Thole, applicants. Mr. Pogge reviewed the request and staff report. He noted that the placement of the house does create a hardship, and the proposed deck would not impact any adjacent property owners. Eric Thole was present. No comments were received when the hearing was opened. Mr. Peroceschi, seconded by Mr. Carlsen, moved approval as conditioned. Motion passed 7-1, with Mr. Dahlquist voting no and Mr. Junker absent. Case No. V/06-31 A variance to the fence regulations for a 54" fence (42" allowed) at 907 W. Willard St. in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Gaye Lundstrom, applicant. Mr. Pogge reviewed the request and staff findings. He noted that the fence, which is already in place, is an ornamental, wrought iron fence that does not obstruct vision. He did note that one complaint had been received. Ms. Lundstrom was present. She pointed out the decorative fence is unobtrusive and has a large opening in front. Mr. Gag opened the public hearing. Margaret Peterson, 919 W. Willard, said she has no problem seeing when backing out of her driveway. She said she thought the fence was beautiful and adds to the property. Roger Holten, 904 W. Willard, also said he liked the fence and thought it adds to the neighborhood and property. 0 City of Stillwater Planning Commission July 10, 2006 Larry Malowski said he would like the fence to stay and said he thought the applicant had done a wonderful job at renovation. I• City of Stillwater Planning Commission No other comments were received. Mr. Teske, seconded by Mr. Meinke, moved approval as conditioned. Motion passed unanimously. Case No. V/06-32 A variance to the side yard corner setback (25 feet required, 10 feet requested) for construction of a residence at 735 Liberty Court in the LR, Lakeshore Residential District. American Classic Homes, applicant. Mr. Pogge reviewed the request and staff findings. He noted the type of turn-around involved was used to avoid the loss of a lot. He noted this is a platted lot and said staff believes a house can be constructed on the lot using other design considerations. Tim Johnson was present representing American Classic Homes. Mr. Johnson noted that the hammerhead is not classified as a street and the only easement is for emergency access. He said the proposed house design is attempting to be respectful of neighbors. Mr. Johnson noted the letter of objection included in the agenda packet was written by the owners of a house that is quite a bit higher than this house would be, and he said he didn't think the proposed house would adversely affect the other property owners' view. Mr. Gag opened the public hearing. Deborah Charpentier, 725 Liberty Court, said the proposal encroaches on her privacy and said there is a wetland easement involved. She said she would like to see the house reconfigured to meet the easements. He also noted that the other property owners (Tom Pedersen and Mary Ann Gire) who wrote the letter could not be in attendance, but wanted her to express their concerns. No other comments were received, and the hearing was closed. Mr. Teske noted there is no question as to what the required setbacks are and what easements are involved and moved to deny Case No. V/06-32. Mr. Dahlquist seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Case No. V/06-33 A variance to the rear yard setback (25 feet required, 20 feet requested) for a pool at 113 Myrtlewood Court in the RA, Single Family Residential District. Troy Krammer, applicant. Mr. Pogge reviewed the staff findings and recommendations. Mr. Krammer stated he was aware of the underground drainage easement when he purchased the property. He responded to the staff findings as presented in a letter included in the agenda packet. Mr. Krammer also provided a letter from an engineering firm, as requested by City Engineer Sanders, which provided an opinion that the proposed pool did not represent a load greater than could be withstood by the underground drainage pipe. Mr. Krammer said the pool would have no adverse impact on neighbors and said the homeowners' association had provided a letter indicating the association has no problem with the plans. Mr. Krammer further stated that he would be happy to change his plans and utilize an oval pool in order to meet the 10-foot setback required of all pools. • Mr. Peroceschi asked if staff would have to review the revised plans. Mr. Turnblad said not if the plans are clear enough. Mr. Teske said he did not think the 25-foot setback required of all City of Stillwater Planning Commission July 10, 2006 structures should apply to this request for an above-ground pool. Mr. Teske moved approval of the revised plans with the condition that the pool be no closer than 11 feet to the rear property line and that all revisions to the approved plan be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. Mr. Middleton seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Case No. SUP/06-34 A special use permit for construction of a 265-space parking lot at 14949 62nd St. N. in the PA, Public Administration District. Don Theisen, Washington County Government Center, applicant. Mr. Pogge reviewed the staff report and findings. He noted that the County is requesting the parking lot expansion at this time in anticipation of a building expansion in the near future, at which time a PUD will be submitted. The report noted that lighting and landscape plans had not been submitted, but should be required. Representing Washington County were Ann Pung Terwedo and Ted Schonecker. Ms. Terwedo stated the proposed parking expansion would be used primarily for employee parking. She said the County is working on a major expansion and is seeking approval of the parking expansion at this time to meet current needs. Mr. Schonecker reviewed plans for the parking lot. He noted that the County is planning rain gardens and is working with the water management organization regarding stormwater retention plans. He stated that the lighting plan must meet Oak Park Heights requirements according the joint powers agreement between the County and the cities of Stillwater and Oak Park Heights. Mr. Schonecker noted the County hosted a public information meeting to receive input regarding the parking expansion plans - no people attended the meeting. Mr. Teske moved approval of the SUP as conditioned. Mr. Carlsen asked about the preservation of trees. Mr. Teske agreed to add submission of a tree preservation plan as a condition of approval. Mr. Peroceschi seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Case No. V/06-37 A variance to the Bluffland Shoreland Regulations for replacement of an existing deck at 114 Lakeside Drive in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Jon and Deanne Stratte, applicants. Mr. Pogge reviewed the staff findings and recommendations. It was noted that the original deck was construction prior to the formation of the Bluffland Shoreland Overlay District. He said the DNR has no objection to the footprint of the existing deck. Jon Stratte was present. He noted there has always been a deck on the house. The existing deck was built in the early 1980s and some of the boards are rotting and need to be replaced, as well as to meet new building codes. The proposed deck will be slightly smaller than the original structure, he said. Mr. Teske, seconded by Mr. Peroceschi, moved approval as conditioned. Motion passed unanimously. Case No. SUP/V/SUB/06-38 A special use permit for a private parking facility for more than five cars; variance to the parking regulations; and lot combination of two lots - one lot of 12,119 July 10, 2006 square feet and the second lot of 5,519 square feet - into one lot of 17,638 square feet at 227 N. Main St. in the CBD, Central Business District. Mainstream Development Partnership, LLC, applicant. City of Stillwater Planning Commission Mr. Turnblad reviewed the staff report and findings. He noted that the applicant had revised plans so the proposed structure is two stories with one level of underground parking. The last revision eliminates the need for a variance from the infill height regulations. He noted that the two items for the Commissions consideration are the requested SUP for the parking structure and variance from the parking spaces provided. The issue regarding the vacation of an existing easement is a Council decision, he noted. He said a parking inventory indicates there is sufficient parking in the area of the proposed building and the building use will not impact the peak demand times. Staff recommends approval with15 conditions, he concluded. Tim Stefan, representing the applicant, stated the previous plans were an attempt to clarify the City's new height regulations. He said the latest revision is a design they are happy with and believe will be successful. Mr. Junker noted that the Loft model has been removed from the nearby public parking area, which opens up 85 parking spaces. Mr. Stefan said they had photos surveys that show there are only about 10-15 cars in that lot during business hours. Ms. Block noted that the tenants for the second floor office space in the new building are existing downtown tenants and will not add to parking demand. Mr. Middleton noted there are many downtown businesses that don't provide their own parking. Mr. Teske moved approval of the SUP and parking variance as conditioned. Mr. Middleton seconded the motion. Members expressed their appreciation to the applicant for the willingness to listen to and modify plans to satisfy the Commission and Council's concerns. Motion to approve as conditioned passed unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS Case No. 06-35 Sketch discussion on a proposed 17-lot residential development at 12205 McKusick Road N. in the RR, Rural Residential District. Krech Exteriors, applicant. Case No. 06-36 Sketch discussion on a proposed 22-lot residential development at 8233, 8313, 8483 Marylane Ave. N. in the RR, Rural Residential District. Classic Home Design, applicant. Representatives of both potential developers were present. Mr. Pogge briefly reviewed the plans and some of the issues. Mr. Gag suggested that the whole area in question needs to be looked at. Mr. Turnblad noted that the City has pushed for that, but there are too many property owners involved. Mr. Junker said he liked the square footage and proposed lot sizes but noted that the Manning Station development had been denied due to concerns about the infrastructure and Manning Avenue. Kathy Hemen, 8233 Marylane Ave. N., urged the Commission not to allow development in bits and pieces, but to develop the entire area properly. is Ms. Block noted that Manning Avenue is already highly overused with no plans for improvements on the roadway from County Road 12 to Highway 96. She said the proposals City of Stillwater Planning Commission July 10, 2006 square feet and the second lot of 5,519 square feet - into one lot of 17,638 square feet at 227 N. Main St. in the CBD, Central Business District. Mainstream Development Partnership, LLC, applicant. Mr. Turnblad reviewed the staff report and findings. He noted that the applicant had revised plans so the proposed structure is two stories with one level of underground parking. The last revision eliminates the need for a variance from the infill height regulations. He noted that the two items for the Commissions consideration are the requested SUP for the parking structure and variance from the parking spaces provided. The issue regarding the vacation of an existing easement is a Council decision, he noted. He said a parking inventory indicates there is sufficient parking in the area of the proposed building and the building use will not impact the peak demand times. Staff recommends approval with15 conditions, he concluded. Tim Stefan, representing the applicant, stated the previous plans were an attempt to clarify the City's new height regulations. He said the latest revision is a design they are happy with and believe will be successful. Mr. Junker noted that the Loft model has been removed from the nearby public parking area, which opens up 85 parking spaces. Mr. Stefan said they had photos surveys that show there are only about 10-15 cars in that lot during business hours. Ms. Block noted that the tenants for the second floor office space in the new building are existing downtown tenants and will not add to parking demand. Mr. Middleton noted there are many downtown businesses that don't provide their own parking. Mr. Teske moved approval of the SUP and parking variance as conditioned. Mr. Middleton seconded the motion. Members expressed their appreciation to the applicant for the willingness to listen to and modify plans to satisfy the Commission and Council's concerns. Motion to approve as conditioned passed unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS Case No. 06-35 Sketch discussion on a proposed 17-lot residential development at 12205 McKusick Road N. in the RR, Rural Residential District. Krech Exteriors, applicant. Case No. 06-36 Sketch discussion on a proposed 22-lot residential development at 8233, 8313, 8483 Marylane Ave. N. in the RR, Rural Residential District. Classic Home Design, applicant. Representatives of both potential developers were present. Mr. Pogge briefly reviewed the plans and some of the issues. Mr. Gag suggested that the whole area in question needs to be looked at. Mr. Turnblad noted that the City has pushed for that, but there are too many property owners involved. Mr. Junker said he liked the square footage and proposed lot sizes but noted that the Manning Station development had been denied due to concerns about the infrastructure and Manning Avenue. Kathy Hemen, 8233 Marylane Ave. N., urged the Commission not to allow development in bits and pieces, but to develop the entire area properly. Ms. Block noted that Manning Avenue is already highly overused with no plans for • improvements on the roadway from County Road 12 to Highway 96. She said the proposals City of Stillwater Planning Commission July 10, 2006 would impact an already desperate situation. Mr. Carlsen said the proposed development in the area look like a patchwork quilt, with no pattern. Given issues related to traffic and utilities, Mr. Carlsen spoke in favor of putting the brakes on any annexation/development and looking at the whole area. Mr. Junker and Mr. Teske both called for the Commission to look at the entire quadrant and discuss what type of development the Commission/City would like to see for that area. Mr. Dahlquist said there was no way he would consider early annexation without a coherent plan and approach to development of the properties in question. 10 A representative of the developers asked if they could be part of the Comprehensive Plan It was suggested that the action of the Commission could be a straw vote on the issue of annexation. Mr. Teske moved to recommend that the Council consider no further annexation in that area (the northwest quadrant) of the City due to traffic concerns and the lack of clear vision for development. The language of the motion was amended to recommend denial of any additional development in the area of Manning/McKusick until transportation/infrastructure improvements are made that will allow for additional development. Mr. Dahlquist said he would be reluctant to have a blanket denial, as there are some instances where early annexation might make sense. Ms. Block seconded the motion. Mr. Junker said the Commission needs to develop a vision for the area, a vision that addresses density and other issues, and suggested that focus could come with the upcoming Comprehensive Plan update. The motion was amended to specify denial relates to Cases No. 06-35 and 06-36 and Manning Station and the area south of McKusick Road and west of Neal Avenue. Motion passed unanimously. amendment process. Mr. Turnblad responded they would be welcome to participate and should ask to be on the mailing list so as to be aware of when discussions/workshops are scheduled. Mr. Middleton, seconded by Mr. Peroceschi, moved to adjourn at 10:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sharon Baker Recording Secretary 0