HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-10-09 CPC MINCity of Stillwater
Planning Commission
October 9, 2006
Present: Dave Middleton, Vice Chairman, Suzanne Block, Gregg Carlsen, Mike Dahlquist,
David Junker, Dan Kalmon, Brad Meinke, and David Peroceschi
Staff present: Planner Mike Pogge
Absent: Robert Gag
Vice Chairman Middleton called the meeting to order at 7 p.m.
Approval of minutes: Mr. Junker, seconded by Mr. Dahlquist, moved approval of the
minutes of September 11, 2006. Motion passed unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Case No. V/06-52 A variance to the street side (front yard) setback (30 feet required, 9
feet requested) for construction of a two-car garage at 521 S. Fifth St. in the RB, Two
Family Residential District. Barbara Greeder, applicant.
Present representing the applicant were Ms Greeder and Brad Swager. Mr. Pogge
reviewed the case, noting that the Heritage Preservation Commission has granted a
demolition permit to remove the existing structure. The applicant requested in their
application that the garage be constructed an additional 2' farther north from Walnut
Street. Mr. Pogge said it is staff's recommendation that the new garage be setback a
minimum of 20 feet from the back of the curb, a recommendation that Ms. Greeder said
she was comfortable with. Mr. Pogge stated staff's opinion is that the three criteria for
granting a variance have been met and staff recommends approval as conditioned.
Mr. Carlsen asked if the existing sewer easement would be a problem. Mr. Pogge noted
the easement is a private easement between Ms. Greeder and a neighbor and it would
be up to the owner to exercise due diligence so as not to create a problem. Ms. Greeder
stated with the 20' setback, there should be no problem with the sewer easement.
Mr. Middleton opened the public hearing. No comments were received, and the hearing
was closed. Ms. Block, seconded by Mr. Dahlquist, moved approval as conditioned.
Motion passed unanimously.
Case No. V/06-54 A variance to the side yard setback (10 feet required, 5 feet
requested) for construction of a garage at 609 S. Broadway in the RB, Two Family
Residential District. Myron Reubendale, applicant.
City of Stillwater
Planning Commission
October 9, 2006
The applicant was present. Mr. Pogge reviewed the staff findings and recommendation
for approval as conditioned. Mr. Pogge noted that the Heritage Preservation
Commission had reviewed and approved the proposed design of the structure. Mr.
Reubendale noted they felt a two-story structure, as proposed, is more in keeping with
the Victorian architecture of their primary structure.
Vice Chair Middleton opened the public hearing. Terry Zoller, 615 S. Broadway, said
they have no objections to the proposal and said he thought a two-story structure
would look better than a one-story structure. No other comments were received, and
the hearing was closed. Mr. Junker, seconded by Mr. Dahlquist, moved approval as
conditioned. Motion passed unanimously.
Case No. V/06-55 A variance to the front yard setback (30 feet required, 14 feet
requested) for construction of a porch at 209 N. Third St. in the PA, Public
Administration District. Tom Huninghake, applicant.
Mr. Huninghake was present. He noted there are no other houses on the block that
meet the required 30' setback. He stated the request is to enable them to add: 2' more
to the original structure, and possibly add a garage in the future. Mr. Pogge reviewed
the staff findings and recommendation for approval. Mr. Pogge noted that the variance
would allow for future expansion that would meet all other setbacks/requirements.
Mr. Middleton opened the public hearing.' No comments were received, and the hearing
was closed. Mr. Carlsen moved approval of the requested variance.. Mr. Junker
seconded the motion, noting the applicant had done a great job of rehabilitating the
structure and saving the house from demolition. Motion to approve passed
unanimously.'
Case No. CPA/ZAM/ZAT/06-53 A Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zoning Map
Amendment and Zoning Text Amendment to create a new zoning district for lots 1,3
and 5-14 Block 10, Greeley and Slaughters Addition (110 S. Greeley St.) in the RB, Two
Family Residential District. Timothy Freeman, representing Heidi Rosebud, applicant.
Present were applicant Heidi Rosebud, Tim Freeman of Folz, Freeman, Erickson and
Baiers Heeren, attorney for Ms. Rosebud. Mr. Pogge reviewed the request and staff
findings. He spoke to a 2002 change in the City's zoning code that eliminated the
issuance of special use permits in the Two-Family Residential District for limited
commercial uses. Mr. Pogge said staff had suggested that Ms. Rosebud make
application to create a new zoning district that recognizes existing businesses in
residential districts; included in the packet was a proposed Existing Business District
zoning change drafted by the Planning Commission in 1980 to address issues such as
this. Mr. Pogge noted that staff recommends the proposed Zoning Text Amendment
(Neighborhood Business District) and the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zoning
2
City of Stillwater
Planning Commission
October 9, 2006
Map Amendment, but excluding the properties at 109 and 121 S. Owens St. Mr. Pogge
noted that, as proposed, not all historic commercial properties would be rezoned at this
time --individual property owners could choose to make application for rezoning. Mr.
Pogge also spoke to the controls afford the City in the requirement that property
owners requesting a rezoning must submit a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) addressing
issues such as parking, lighting, landscaping and signage.
Mr. Middleton questioned whether this proposal would amount to "spot zoning." Ms.
Block and Mr. Junker both questioned the definition of Neighborhood Commercial as
"uses that are convenient to the adjacent areas and not for community-wide uses,"
noting that Len's Family Foods and Nelson's Ice Cream store users are not just from the
immediate area but come from throughout the community. Mr. Kalmon noted that the
City would be updating its Comprehensive Plan in the near future and suggested
perhaps this request should be looked at in that process. Mr. Middleton asked if it would
be a benefit to create the new zoning district. Mr. Pogge responded that the new
district would legitimize property owners' rights and specify conditions and parameters
of business operations. Mr. Carlsen asked why the City changed the ordinance in 20.02;
Mr. Pogge said he was unsure of the reason.
Mr. Freeman noted that due to the change in the ordinance, Ms. Rosebud is hampered
from doing anything to her business that is not specifically listed in the original SUP. He
noted the property currently is mis-zoned. He said this is a citywide issue. However, he
said the applicant was told that City staff was too busy to address the issue and nothing
would be done unless Ms. Rosebud moved forward with the proposal for a new zoning
district. He said their intent was not to get the cart in front of the horse - move forward
with the zoning issue and then come back with specific plans for the properties. In fact,
he said Ms. Rosebud was told to stop moving forward with plans until the zoning issue
is addressed. Mr. Heeren added that the proposal provides the City with significant
oversight through the CUP requirement.
Mr. Middleton opened the public hearing.
Dick Reed, 118 S. Owens St., spoke in favor of the proposal, including all of the
requested properties. He spoke of Ms. Rosebud's contributions to the neighborhood and
the quality of her business and improvements.
Ted Gillen, 1011 W. Myrtle St., objected to including any of the residential properties in
any rezoning, citing traffic issues and loss of property values. He also questioned the
language of the proposed ordinance, whether the district is "Neighborhood Commercial"
or "Business."
Susanna Patterson, 1018 W. Olive St., spoke of preserving the character of the
neighborhood. She referred to a letter from Ms. Rosebud regarding plans to move the
3
City of Stillwater
Planning Commission
October 9, 2006
house at 125 S. Owens St and use the property for a parking lot, something she said
would diminish the value of her property both monetarily and intrinsically.
Kurt Weidler, 206 S. Greeley St., said he could appreciate the fact that Ms. Rosebud
may want to expand her business, but said any expansion would change the character
of the neighborhood and asked what would stop others from expanding their
businesses. He recommended that the City not approve the request.
Al Roettger, 919 W. Myrtle, spoke against including any properties on Owens Street in
any rezoning.
Dennis Hoffbeck, 206 S. Owens, said he could understand the need for a zoning change
for the properties on Greeley Street but not Owens Street. He suggested that those
properties be considered separately, saying he preferred that the Owens properties say
residential and not too commercialized.
Letters from Mr. Reed, Ms. Patterson. and Mr. Weidler stating their positions were
included in the agenda packet.
No other comments were received, and the hearing was closed.
Mr. Middleton suggested the Commission should start with the proposed Zoning. Text
Amendment. Mr. Dahlquist suggested the language should include a definition of
"historic commercial." Mr. Pogge suggested that definition is in Item 2b of the draft - "a
legal non-conforming use." There also was discussion of language defining
"neighborhood service." Mr. Pogge pointed out the language was purposefully left
vague in order to give more power to the Planning Commission and Council to decide
requests for rezoning on a case by case basis. Mr. Carlsen and Mr. Kalmon spoke of
looking at the matter in context of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment; Mr. Meinke
suggested that would be unfair to Ms. Rosebud, noting she was not responsible for the
change in the City's zoning ordinance. There was discussion as to how to address
expansion of existing neighborhood businesses and how restrictive the Commission
wants to be regarding expansion to adjacent properties. Mr. Dahlquist said he would be
in favor of limiting expansion, but suggested that needs to be defined. Mr. Carlsen
suggested mapping existing properties that would be affected by the creation of the
new zoning district. It was consensus to table this request and direct staff to more
clearly define "neighborhood business district," identify current businesses that would
be affected, and provide recommendations on how to address growth issues." Mr.
Pogge spoke briefly of the 60-day review rule involved in tabling. Mr. Junker, seconded
by Mr. Dahlquist, moved to table this case until the next meeting; motion passed
unanimously.
4
City of Stillwater
Planning Commission
October 9, 2006
OTHER BUSINESS
City of Stillwater - Determination of TIF District amendment consistency with the
Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Pogge showed a map of the new properties proposed to be
added to TIF District 10 in the Downtown District. Mr. Pogge pointed out TIF is a
funding mechanism for possible improvements, such as a parking structure, which is a
priority in the Downtown Plan. He noted that finding the amendment consistent with
the Comprehensive Plan and Downtown Plan is a requirement of state law. Mr.
Dahlquist and Ms. Block both stated they wished they had the information earlier. Mr.
Meinke, seconded by Mr. Junker, moved approval of the resolution finding the TIF
District amendment to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Motion passed 7-0,
with Mr. Dahlquist abstaining.
Ms. Block, seconded by Mr. Junker, moved to adjourn at 9:25 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Sharon Baker
Recording Secretary
5