Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-02-12 CPC MINCity of Stillwater Planning Commission February 12, 2007 Present: Dave Middleton, Chairman, Suzanne Block, Gregg Carlsen, Mike Dahlquist, Dan Kalmon, Brad Meinke, Wally Milbrandt, David Peroceschi and Charles Wolden Staff present: Community Development Director Turnblad and Planner Pogge Mr. Middleton called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. Approval of minutes: Mr. Dahlquist moved approval of the minutes of Jan. 8, 2007, with a correction to his name in the last paragraph. Mr. Carlsen seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. 07-06 A special use permit for a pop machine at 132 S. Main St. (St. Croix Drug) in the CBD, Central Business District, and any variances related thereto. Lyle Anderson, applicant. The applicant was not present. Mr. Pogge reviewed the staff report and findings. He noted that the Heritage Preservation Commission had reviewed and approved the request with the condition that the machine not be backlighted. Mr. Middleton opened the public hearing. No comments were received, and the hearing was closed. Mr. Kalmon asked whether there was consideration of any public health issues, such as • the type of items offered; Mr. Pogge responded that is not considered in the application. Mr. Dahlquist said the only feedback he has received is that the machine should be completely off the sidewalk, and a desire that the machine look historic, if possible. Mr. Milbrandt expressed his disappointment that the applicant was not present. Mr. Milbrandt suggested adding a condition that the permit be issued for one year only. Mr. Meinke noted a pop machine has been at this location for many years, and it is not in the way of pedestrian traffic. Mr. Meinke moved approval with the condition that the machine not be internally lighted; at the request of Mr. Milbrandt, Mr. Meinke added a condition that the permit be for one year. Mr. Milbrandt seconded the motion. Motion passed 8-1, with Mr. Dahlquist voting no. Case No. 07-07 Final approval of Phase I development of Millbrook, including final plat approval for 59 single-family homes in Phase I; final PUD approval for Phase I; a PUD amendment related to townhouse design; and any variances related thereto. US Home, applicant. Representing the applicant were Jay Liberacki and Teresa St. Amant. Community Development Director Turnblad reviewed the staff report. Phase I of the development includes two plats, as proposed. The first plat, for which approval is sought, includes 30 single-family lots in the CR, Cottage Residential District, and 33 single-family homes in the TR, Traditional Residential District, he noted. The second plat in Phase I includes about half of the proposed townhouses. Mr. Turnblad noted that the design of the townhouses has changed from the initially proposed brownstones to a back-to-back layout. Other than the townhouse design and several additional lots, the Phase I first plat is essentially the same as what was approved in the preliminary plat. Mr. Turnblad noted that the 14 conditions of approval have been or will be met. • Mr. Liberacki and Ms. St. Amant spoke to the proposed change in design of the townhouses. Mr. Liberacki suggested that the changes solve many of the previous issues related to • City of Stillwater Planning Commission February 12, 2007 • parking/guest parking. Ms. St. Amant noted that changing demographics and market demand resulted in the proposal to bring down the height of the townhouse to two stories, rather than the brownstone product. Ms. St. Amant reviewed the various housing products. Ms. Block noted that the design of the CR homes had changed as well, from side-loaded to front-loaded garages, and she pointed out that in plans originally approved, the homes by the lake were single-story residences and now are two-story structures. Mr. Middleton opened the public hearing. No comments were received, and the hearing was closed. Mr. Dahlquist and Ms. Block both expressed a concern that the Commission was being asked to approve a completely different product from what was approved in preliminary plans and from what was discussed in previous public hearings attended by many neighbors. Mr. Meinke, Mr. Carlsen, Mr. Middleton, and Mr. Milbrandt also expressed concern with changes at this point in the process. Mr. Peroceschi pointed out that market conditions have changed. Mr. Kalmon noted that rather than the continuous design of the brownstone townhouses with alleyways, the new design results in a lot of driveway cuts. Mr. Dahlquist said he thought the brownstones provided a good transition from the single-family homes across the street, and noted that the change in design will result in a loss of a lot of on-street parking. Mr. Milbrandt, seconded by Ms. Block, moved to table approval and ask US Homes to come back with a more thoughtful product, including product variety and side-loaded vs. front-loaded garages. Motion passed 8-1, with Mr. Peroceschi voting no. Case No. 07-08 A variance to the corner side porch at 1224 N. Second St. in the RB, Two related thereto. Jedadiah Becker, applicant. yard setback for construction of a garage and Family Residential District, and any variances The applicant was present. Community Development Director Turnblad reviewed the staff report and findings. It was noted that a garage included in the maximum building coverage was removed before the applicant ever purchased the property, thus bringing the proposal closer to compliance with the maximum building coverage; however, a proposed shed was not included in the building coverage figure. Mr. Carlsen noted the project is under way and asked why a building permit had been issued; the applicant was not issued a building permit. Mr. Carlsen asked if there were any drawings of the proposed porch. The applicant explained the plans are to extend the porch across the front of the house. Mr. Middleton opened the public hearing. No comments were received, and the hearing was closed. Mr. Carlsen expressed a concern that detailed plans were not provided and said he would at least like to see staff review and approve of plans for the porch. Mr. Dahlquist pointed out that many times approval of such requests is conditioned on an addition matching the main structure in design, materials, colors, etc., and said since plans have not been provided, the Commission could ask that plans be reviewed by staff. Mr. Dahlquist said he felt the requested variances for the house addition were reasonable as they match the existing setbacks; he also noted that the impervious surface coverage was fairly low. It was noted that a variance for the proposed shed is not required as long as the shed is not larger than 120 square feet; the applicant stated the shed would be 10x10. Mr. Dahlquist moved to approve the requested variances with the condition that the building plans be reviewed by the Community Development City of Stillwater Planning Commission February 12, 2007 Director or designee and that the building permit confirm that the shed be 10x10 as indicated by the applicant. Mr. Peroceschi seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Case No. 07-09 A preliminary Planned Unit Development for a 50-lot development on 25.28 acres at 125425 75th St. N. and 12620 and 12550 72nd St. N.; preliminary plat creating 50 single- family lots; and zoning map amendment to rezone the property from AP, Agricultural Preservation, to TR, Traditional Residential, and LR, Lakeshore Residential; and any variances related thereto. Ed Dulach, Elite Development, applicant. Ed Dulach, Elite Development, and Robert Wiegert, Paramount Engineering & Design, were present representing the applicant. Planner Mike Pogge reviewed the proposal and site. Mr. Pogge noted that the DNR is still reviewing the proposal, and staff is recommending that the application(s) be tabled at this time. Mr. Carlsen asked if there would be any property along Long Lake that would be open to the public. It was noted that the two property owners, Meisterlings and McKenzies, would be retaining the lakeshore property; as proposed, a public trail would go through the existing road along the lake. Mr. Dulach said it is the developer's goal to assist the City in purchasing nearby DNR property to connect to the public trail. Mr. Wiegert addressed the request for a variance for a fence; he said the stucco fence, which would provide noise mitigation along County Road 12, is proposed as a way to preserve existing trees in the area. The alternative to a fence would be an earthen berm, Mr. Wiegert said. • Mr. Middleton opened the public hearing. Mellissa Klemenhagen, 3174 Summer Fields Green, asked whether there would be a water tower on the property; it was noted that the City has requested that the developer provide a site for a well pump house only, not a tower. Ms. Klemenhagen also questioned the amount of park space, and she asked whether the lake lots are included in computing the average lot size. Heidi Burns, Mid Oaks Avenue, asked about the alignment of the existing 72nd St. and whether anything could be done to level out the hill. She spoke of existing safety concerns and suggested the development will increase traffic. Ms. Burns also asked about the proposed trail, where it would start and end and what the trail would connect to. Michelle Whitehead, 3183 Summer Fields Green, asked who the builder would be and asked about the style of homes proposed for the development. Mr. Dulach provided an architectural rendering of a proposed home. No other comments were received, and the hearing was closed. Mr. Milbrandt questioned the amount of proposed park dedication. Mr. Dulach reiterated that the developer is trying to work with the DNR regarding City acquisition of the DNR property adjacent to the site. Mr. Dulach said the development will be marketed to folks in the 55+ age category, and he noted there are many parks in the nearby area; he also said the developer is working with Grace Baptist Church regarding plans to provide playing fields on church property in the future. Ms. Block noted that in earlier discussions regarding the development proposal, residents had pointed out that the play fields at Rutherford Elementary School are not available to the public and shouldn't be considered when determining park needs for this development. Mr. Kalmon questioned what the • City would gain by obtaining the DNR property. • City of Stillwater Planning Commission February 12, 2007 Mr. Milbrandt spoke in favor of relaying action on the request pending review and comment by the Park Board; he also stated he would like to see more details regarding the trail plan. Mr. Dahlquist stated feedback from the DNR remains a big issue, and he asked whether that agency's comments could result in significant changes to the plans. Mr. Pogge stated it is possible the DNR comments could result in significant changes. Mr. Dahlquist also expressed a concern about another north-south road connection, given the likelihood that Minor Avenue will be extended to County Road 12 in the future. Mr. Carlsen spoke in favor of trying to acquire public property along the north side of the lake, as well as in favor of larger lot sizes in the development. Mr. Dahlquist, seconded by Mr. Wolden, moved to table this application pending comments from the Park Board and DNR. Motion passed unanimously. Case No. 07-10 Amendment to a Planned Unit Development for Washington County Government Center for expansion of the government center campus and any variances related thereto. Don Theisen, applicant. Planner Mike Pogge reviewed the staff report and findings. He noted that it is recommended the tree protection plan be amended in order to save as many trees on the southern portion of the site as possible. He also pointed out that a condition of approval is that the gravel road from the Law Enforcement Center to Paris Avenue North be removed or paved with an access control • mechanism installed to limit traffic. Mr. Dahlquist referred to the increase in the number of parking spaces and a concern about the increased traffic and access to Highway 36. It was noted the County will be installing signals at Osgood and 62nd street as a temporary solution; Mr. Milbrandt pointed out that improvements to the Highway 36 corridor in conjunction with a new river crossing have gone by the wayside. Ann Terwedo, senior planner for Washington County, briefly reviewed the overall proposal. She noted that the plans will not create much more surface on the campus site, as the proposal is to build up on the existing building pad. Ms. Terwedo also stated she would like more feedback from the Sheriff's Office regarding the condition relating to the gravel access from the Law Enforcement Center to Paris Avenue. Ted Schoenecker reviewed storm water treatment plans; Joel Dunning reviewed building plans. Mr. Middleton opened the public hearing. The resident of 15143 Upper 63rd Street stated the gravel road in question is not used for emergencies only. She questioned whether a five-story structure is in keeping with the neighborhood. She spoke of the overall impact of the government center on the neighborhood, an impact ranging from the sounds of snowplowing to lighting. She questioned whether a proposed pathway around the campus would be open to the public and also expressed a concern about retaining trees on the eastern portion of the site. Dewey Miller, 810 W. Pine Street, spoke of the concept of community-based services versus centralization of services. He also questioned the proposed building design. • No other comments were received, and the hearing was closed. Ms. Terwedo responded that the trees on the eastern portion of the site will be retained. She noted that earlier plans called • City of Stillwater Planning Commission February 12, 2007 for a road around the center; those plans were eliminated as a result of conversations with Oak Park Heights and Stillwater. The ring road has been replaced with pedestrian access around the campus. She again stated that she would need more information from the Sheriff's Office regarding the access to Paris Avenue. Regarding lighting, Ms. Terwedo noted the County is following Oak Park Heights' regulations, which are more restrictive than Stillwater's. Mr. Milbrandt moved approval with the 21 conditions as recommended by staff, with County and City staff and Sheriff's Office to develop the specifics relating to Condition No. 21 (the access to Paris Avenue). Mr. Kalmon suggested that, based on comments heard from the public, the County should go out of its way to mitigate the impact of the government center on the surrounding neighborhood. Motion to approve as conditioned passed unanimously. Case No. SUP/93-41 Review of the special use permit for the Elephant Walk Bed and Breakfast at 801 W. Pine St. and any variances related thereto. Community Development Director Turnblad explained that because two anonymous complaints had been received regarding on-street parking, a public hearing was scheduled to allow neighbors the opportunity to be part of the annual review process for the special use permit. Mr. Turnblad noted that the Elephant Walk does meet the B&B parking regulations -- one off-street space per guestroom and additional off-street spaces for owner use. The Elephant Walk meets all 11 conditions attached to its special use permit, Mr. Turnblad stated. He said other i complaints that have been received appear to be personality conflicts between the owners and neighboring property owners. Mr. Middleton opened the public hearing. Dewey Miller, 810 W. Pine St., spoke in favor of the Elephant Walk and the fine things it contributes to the neighborhood. He also stated he had never had a problem regarding guests parking on the street. Joe Thompson, 828 W. Willard, stated he had written the letter of complaint. He related an incident in which one of the Elephant Walk proprietors called the police because his children were outside and making noise at 7:30 p.m. at night. Tom Tierney, 717 W. Pine St., stated he had been opposed to the last three requests related to the Elephant Walk, including the addition to the garage. He related a number of conflicts with the proprietors ranging from the placement of a fence to snow removal issues. He stated that on-street parking is an issue. Sherry Wexler stated she was at the Thompson home during the incident when police were called due to the children making noise, and she related her feelings about the incident. Kevin Shoeberg, attorney representing the Elephant Walk owners, noted that the business is in compliance with all conditions of the special use permit, and a parking ticket has never been issued. With respect of other issues, he stated there is obviously a difference of opinion regarding the appropriateness of the level of noise. Mr. Shoeberg noted that no permit can City of Stillwater Planning Commission February 12, 2007 guarantee there will not be a personality conflict. He reiterated that no complaints have to do with the nature of the business. Terri Kampmeyer, 811 W. Pine St., stated they have never had a problem with the owners or guests. In fact, they have had a friendly relationship with their neighbors. Owners of the Sauntry Mansion, Ann Bean and Rivertown Inn B&Bs all spoke on behalf of the Elephant Walk owners, speaking of the business's fine reputation. It also was noted that any revocation of a special use permit must be directly related to the SUP under which it operates. Rita Graybill, owner of the Elephant Walk, briefly spoke on her own behalf. Other letters of support were included in the agenda packet. Kelly Franz, Dallager Court, asked that fair consideration also be given to the Thompsons situation. Dean Mattson, 722 Pine St., stated he was puzzled by the review of private issues in a public forum. He stated he had been a neighbor of the Elephant Walk for 15 years and had never had a problem. Michelle Gerard, Country Road, spoke on behalf of her daughter, who was present at the Thompsons' house when police were called by the Elephant Walk proprietor. She said the children were scared and had to do a police report. Julia Sandstrom, 212 W. Cherry St., also spoke on behalf of the Thompsons. No other comments were received, and the hearing was closed. Mr. Dahlquist noted that there are issues involved here, but not issues associated with the operation of the business and moved approval of the renewal of the Elephant Walk SUP. Mr. Middleton seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Meeting was adjourned at 11:15 p.m. on a motion by Mr. Meinke. Respectfully submitted, Sharon Baker Recording Secretary r1 U 6