HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-06-11 CPC MIN• City of Stillwater
Planning Commission
June 11, 2007
Present: Dave Middleton, Chairperson, Suzanne Block, Mike Dahlquist, Dan Kalmon, Wally
Milbrandt (7 p.m.), David Peroceschi, and Charles Wolden
Staff present: Community Development Director Turnblad and Planner Pogge
Absent: Gregg Carlsen
Prior to the start of the regular meeting, the Commission held a workshop session with a
representative of Bonestroo regarding the Comprehensive Plan draft background report.
Mr. Middleton called the regular meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
Approval of minutes: The minutes of May 14, 2007, were approved by unanimous vote.
Case No. 07-24 A variance request to the maximum allowed impervious surface and to the
minimum side yard setback for construction of a 34' x 40' two-story addition at the southeast
corner of an existing building and a 14'8" x 24" one-story addition to the west wall of an existing
building at 1826 Northwestern Ave. in the BP-O, Business Park Office District. River Valley
Place LLC, Summer Kuehn, applicant.
The applicant was present. Mr. Pogge reviewed the request for the three variances - parking,
impervious surface coverage, and side yard setback - and staff findings. He stated it is staff's
recommendation that this case be tabled until additional information is received regarding
possible mitigation of storm water runoff and provision of parking. Ms. Kuehn stated she would
prefer that the matter not be tabled, as she will be unable to attend the July meeting. She stated
she is proposing additional green roof space to mitigate storm water runoff, and she said she
will have 34 parking spots which will be shared with a neighboring business, ReMax. Mr. Pogge
pointed out that staff had never received the break down of uses to determine the parking
requirement.
Mr. Dahlquist suggested the Commission was being asked to evaluate the request based on
information that is not available. Members were in consensus to table the request until the
supporting documentation is provided. Mr. Kalmon suggested that Ms. Kuehn also consider
treatment of runoff water on site, in addition to the green roof mitigation. Mr. Peroceschi,
seconded by Ms. Block, moved to table Case No. 07-24. Motion passed unanimously.
Case No. 07-25 An amendment to a special use permit at Stone's Restaurant for construction of
a permanent outside bar at 324 S. Main St. in the CBD, Central Business District. Eric Hawkins,
applicant.
The applicant was present. Mr. Pogge reviewed the request and stated the request meets all
the requirements for an SUP. He noted there are 10 conditions of approval to protect the public
interest. The HPC has reviewed and approved the design of the structure, he stated.
Ms. Block asked whether the SUP is issued for the business or property. Mr. Pogge stated the
• SUP goes with the property; if the use ceases for a year, the permit expires. Mr. Hawkins stated
he was comfortable with all the conditions of approval with the exception of condition No. 8
. City of Stillwater
Planning Commission
June 11, 2007
related to outdoor music and the 10 p.m. cutoff for outdoor music. Mr. Milbrandt noted that the
City has a noise ordinance and the 10 p.m. deadline is a blanket policy. Mr. Pogge pointed out
that the noise ordinance was in effect when the restaurant obtained the SUP, the 10 p.m.
deadline just wasn't specified in the permit language. Mr. Milbrandt and Ms. Block noted that
nothing has changed unless there is a complaint regarding noise/music.
Mr. Middleton opened the public hearing.
Ginger Johnson, 101 E. Olive St., stated she had called the restaurant on two occasions
regarding the loudness of the music.
Dan Gruba, 1439 Lydia Circle, stated he thought nice dinner music wasn't objectionable and
contributed to a community's nightlife.
No other comments were received, and the hearing was closed. Ms. Block moved approval as
conditioned with the condition that the SUP is subject to review and possible revocation due to
complaints regarding noise. Mr. Wolden stated a basis for possible revocation should include
decibel level and be citywide, not just applicable to this particular business. It was noted the
noise ordinance does include reference to decibel level, and Mr. Pogge noted the suggested
language does provide the City with an opportunity for revocation if there are continual
violations. Mr. Milbrandt disagreed with the need for the language, pointing out the City already
has a noise ordinance. Mr. Peroceschi seconded the motion. Mr. Dahlquist concurred with the
proposed language, noting there is a potential for a change in use and the language provides
the City with an enforcement tool in addition to the potential for a fine. Mr. Dahlquist pointed out
that temporary signage is still in place and asked that a condition be added that the temporary
signage be removed. Ms. Block and Mr. Peroceschi agreed to add a condition regarding the
removal of temporary signage. Motion passed 6-1, with Mr. Milbrandt voting no.
Case No. 07-26 A variance request for the rear yard setback for construction of a deck at 1439
Lydia Circle in the RA, Single Family Residential District. Dan Gruba, applicant.
Dan and Katie Gruba were present. Mr. Pogge reviewed the request and finding that not all
three of the conditions necessary for the granting of a variance were satisfied, specifically that a
deck of dimensions other than proposed by the applicants could be constructed and meet
setback requirements. The Grubas pointed out none of their immediate neighbors have
expressed concerns about their plans. They noted the size deck they are requesting is sufficient
for a table and four chairs; a smaller area would not be sufficient to accommodate that. In
addition, the applicants stated if they shifted the deck to the side of the house, it would be more
of an "eyesore" from the front elevation.
Mr. Middleton opened the public hearing. No comments were received, and the hearing was
closed. Mr. Wolden suggested that cul-de-sacs, such as this location, create the greatest
potential for variance requests. Mr. Wolden also agreed with the Grubas' assessment that it
would look better to have the deck built off the house, rather than moved to the side. Mr.
Wolden moved approval as conditioned; Mr. Milbrandt seconded the motion. Mr. Dahlquist
• stated he could not support the variance, saying he has seen similar requests in other
• City of Stillwater
Planning Commission
June 11, 2007
developments where approval results in overbuilding on small lots. Motion passed 6-1, with Mr.
Dahlquist voting no.
Case No. 07-27 This case was tabled at the request of the applicants.
Case No. 07-28 A special use permit for an accessory dwelling unit and variance to the required
rear yard setback for an accessory dwelling unit at 218 W. Maple St. in the RB, Two Family
Residential District. Matthew Lehmann, applicant.
The applicant was present. Mr. Pogge reviewed the request and staff
findings/recommendations. Mr. Pogge noted the garage with storage space above has already
been completed, and the applicant wants to convert the storage space to an accessory dwelling
unit. He stated that the request meets all requirements for an accessory dwelling unit SUP, with
the exception of the rear and side yard setbacks. He noted that the Heritage Preservation
Commission had reviewed and approved the design. Regarding granting the requested
variance(s), Mr. Pogge noted staff found that the request does not meet all three requirements,
but he pointed out that this garage was constructed prior to the City's instituting a condition
regarding head space in storage areas above garages that precludes eventual conversion of the
garage to accessory dwelling units. Mr. Dahlquist questioned whether the request meets the
maximum 800' size for accessory units. Mr. Pogge responded that measured from the inside
. walls, which is standard practice, the space does meet the 800' maximum.
Mr. Lehmann addressed the three criteria for granting of a variance. He noted that if starting
from scratch, he likely still would request a variance due to the presence of four large trees that
he would want to save. He said the variance probably doesn't meet the criteria regarding the
enjoyment of property rights, but he noted that having the ability of allow family members to stay
for extended period of time would allow them to enjoy their property much more than storage
space. As far as constituting a special privilege, he noted this request is similar to what has
been done in the past.
Mr. Middleton opened the public hearing. No comments were received, and the hearing was
closed. Mr. Milbrandt noted that this request is not changing the structure as currently viewed by
neighbors and moved approval as conditioned. Mr. Kalmon seconded the motion. Mr.
Peroceschi asked what would preclude the accessory unit from being utilized as a rental unit;
Mr. Pogge stated the City can't prohibit that possible use. Mr. Wolden suggested that the
current owners wouldn't remain there forever, and the space definitely was constructed as a
garage. Mr. Dahlquist referred to the time lag when the garage was constructed before the
condition regarding headspace. Motion to approve as conditioned passed 6-1, with Mr. Wolden
voting no.
Case No. 07-29 A variance request to the required lot size regulations and to impervious
surface regulations for properties in the St. Croix Riverway Overlay District at 105 Lakeside
Drive in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Mark S. Balay Architects representing Mark
Smith, applicant.
• Mr. Balay and Mr. Smith were present. Mr. Pogge reviewed the three variance requests, staff
findings and recommendation for approval with 8 conditions. He stated the only question related
. City of Stillwater
Planning Commission
June 11, 2007
to condition No. 3, that the addition be painted earth or summer vegetation colors as requested
by Molly Shodeen of the DNR. Mr. Balay noted there are additional costs, such as the holding
structure and septic inspection, involved with this project due to its location in the River Overlay
District. Mr. Balay noted the house and addition are not visible from the River. The house
currently is painted baby blue, and he said in conversations with Ms. Shodeen, she indicated
the color would not be an issue. Mr. Dahlquist asked whether property owners currently utilizing
septic systems are required to hookup to City sewer/water if available. Mr. Pogge explained that
if a service fails or a property changes hands, hookup is mandatory. Regarding the condition
related to the color, Mr. Dahlquist suggested language could be added that the structure be
painted earth or summer vegetation colors or as approved by the DNR.
Mr. Middleton opened the public hearing. No comments were received, and the hearing was
closed. Ms. Block moved approval as conditioned, adding language to condition No. 3 requiring
painting the structure earth or summer vegetation colors should the DNR make that request. Mr.
Dahlquist seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously.
Case No. 07-30 Final plat and final PUD approval for 44 townhomes, Millbrook 2nd Addition, at
12427 Dellwood Road in the TH, Townhouse District. US Home Corporation, Jay Liberacki,
applicant.
Mr. Liberacki was present. Mr. Turnblad reviewed the site and request. He noted that of the
overall conditions of approval for the preliminary plat, two apply specifically to the townhomes -
that evergreens be planted to screen the driveways from public streets and added along the
north side of White Pine Way between the street and townhome pond and that sidewalks be
extended from the ends of the units to either the sidewalk along the public street or the sidewalk
surrounding the pond. Mr. Turnblad said the condition regarding the sidewalks has been
satisfied. He stated he had just received the landscaping plan, and expects to review those
plans for compliance before this request goes to the City Council. Of the eight conditions related
to the townhomes, a number relate to Heritage Preservations Commission requirements; final
HPC review is scheduled for July 7, he noted. Mr. Turnblad concluded by stating the final plat
and PUD are similar to what was given preliminary approval.
Mr. Liberacki gave a brief update on the progress of the project. He pointed out this is the most
inspected project he has been involved with due to the involvement of the two watershed
districts. He stated that he had one call complaining about dust being generated by trucks; since
the traffic has been moved off Neal Avenue, there have been no more complaints, he said. Mr.
Liberacki inquired about a message he had received from Engineer Shawn Sanders regarding
bump outs in the road by the major park and townhomes. Mr. Turnblad said that was related to
a concern regarding road width, and he said he thought that issue could be worked out before
the City Council hearing.
Mr. Middleton opened the public hearing. No comments were received, and the hearing was
closed. Mr. Milbrandt, seconded by Mr. Peroceschi, moved approval as conditioned. Mr.
Dahlquist pointed out that he was not present for the discussion when the preliminary plans
• were amended changing from brownstone style to back-to-back townhome units and his vote
4
. City of Stillwater
Planning Commission
June 11, 2007
should not be interpreted as being in favor of that change. Motion to approve as conditioned
passed unanimously.
Case No. 07-31 Preliminary plat, preliminary PUD, zoning map and text amendment, and
special use permit for construction of a new K-12 educational facility for St. Croix Preparatory
Academy at 8911 and 8753 Neal Ave. N. in the AP, Agricultural Preservation District. Ken
Stone, Kodet Architectural Group, applicant.
Mr. Turnblad reviewed the request. He noted the property is in the phase 4 annexation area
where early annexation is permitted if the request meets certain criteria. He said it appears the
criteria have been met, it will be up to the City Council to decide if the timing for annexation is
right. He stated the proposal is to have the project completed in three phases, with the first
phase consisting of the school itself and certain infrastructure improvements. The proposal is to
rezone the property RA, which is consistent with the surrounding neighborhood. Schools are a
permitted use in the RA district with a special use permit, he noted.
Mr. Turnblad reviewed the criteria for a special use permit, including that the use not constitute
a nuisance or be detrimental to the neighboring area. He noted that two issues - parking and
traffic -- have arisen. He pointed out that parking needs will increase as more students reach
driving age. In the first year of operation, there will be no student drivers, he said. As upper
classes are added and the school becomes K-12, more parking will be provided. He stated
according to ordinance, 155 spaces will need to be provided. Mr. Turnblad said the proposed
location of the primary parking lot has the potential for the most impact on the neighboring area.
Staff is suggesting that either the parking lot be moved to the north side of the building or a
buffer - retaining wall with berm and plantings - be created. Regarding traffic, he stated a study
done by a traffic consultant concluded that the existing network of streets, with some
modifications, is adequate to handle the traffic that the use would generate. Suggested
modifications to the street network include paving Neal Avenue to Highway 96, a bypass turn at
Neal and Highway 96, and change to the parking lot itself. Mr. Wolden asked if there are
shoreland issues. Mr. Turnblad noted runoff from this property does not reach South Twin Lake.
The real concern, he said, is Brown's Creek and the Brown's Creek Watershed District will
review plans.
Carroll Johnson, Friends of St. Croix Preparatory Academy, and Jon Gutierrez, director of the
Academy, spoke of the history and mission of the school. Edward Kodet, Kodet Architectural
Group, stated they had hosted a community meeting a week ago. This will be a sustainable
school and make the best use of this site, he said. He stated the plans are to extend the paved
area of Neal Avenue 450' and leave the remainder of the road to Highway 96 gravel or overlay.
He briefly reviewed the parking and drop-off area, noting there would be a single entrance to the
school. He said the school would be constructed using sustainable materials.
Mr. Middleton opened the public hearing.
Chuck Benson, 1950 Oak Glen Trail, stated he was opposed to the project due to concerns
regarding traffic; environmental issues; financial issues; and issues related to the
• Comprehensive Plan. He spoke of the traffic/safety issues the project would create on Neal
Avenue, McKusick Road and potentially Oak Glen Trail. He said the project has the potential for
City of Stillwater
Planning Commission
June 11, 2007
light and noise pollution and many DNR and Watershed District issues that must be addressed;
he also spoke of the wildlife that will be displaced by the project. He expressed a concern about
the financial feasibility and the Academy's ability to fund a project of this magnitude. And he
questioned why the City would consider annexing the property at this time at a cost to the
taxpayers.
Erin Lisle, 1841 Heifort Court, said her primary concern was with traffic. She spoke of the City
Code definition of a nuisance and said use of the property for a school will be a nuisance in
regard to traffic. She also noted the project would take away neighbors' view of a pond.
Jeff Klarich, 1975 Oak Glen Trail, suggested that 19 acres is too small for a school and the use
is not a good fit for the property.
Ruth Bruns, 8790 Neal Ave., said she was shocked that plans didn't include paving Neal all the
way to Highway 96. She also spoke of the wildlife in the area and agreed that the site was a
small piece of property for what the school wants to do. She raised a question about wetlands.
Kevin Mattson, 2418 Creekside Court, stated his children attend St. Croix Preparatory
Academy. He said he understood concerns but said he thought things can be worked out in a
good faith process.
G. Rice, 2063 Oak Glen Drive, stated she was looking forward to having her child walk or bike
to school. She suggested that if a school doesn't occupy the site, another development will and
there will still be traffic problems.
Mark Warnken, 1610 Johnson Drive, said in many respects, the school will be a neighborhood
school. He stated the school would be a good neighbor. He said he understood there are
concerns, but thought the concerns can be addressed to everyone's satisfaction.
Ann Kochsiek, 2151, agreed with the concerns regarding traffic. She wondered whether the
school would have its own generator, as there are frequent power outages in the area.
Lisa Holmquist, 2310 Oak Glen Court, expressed a concern about traffic and about walkers on
Oak Glen Trail. She spoke of the traffic conditions at Highway 96 and County Road 15 and
McKusick Road and County Road 15. She said if property owners to the south of the school are
satisfied and traffic concerns are addressed, she would not be opposed to the school.
Tom Swendenberg, 13067 53rd Place N., said he thought the school would be a great neighbor
and said he thought concerns can be worked out.
Steve Schoonmaker, 2300 Bayberry Ave., said the school is good for Stillwater. He said he
knows there are a lot of challenges but asked that the school be given a chance to work through
the challenges.
Jerry Daniels, 1860 Oak Glen Drive, questioned how it would be possible to get the traffic
generated by a 1,000-student school up a single-lane road. He stated the school was out of
place in a residential area.
• City of Stillwater
Planning Commission
June 11, 2007
Eric Knutson, 1930 Oak Glen Trail, called for a traffic study by a non-biased source. He
questioned whether a berm would be possible due to the slope of the land, and he raised the
issue of a possible conflict of interest involving a Commission member whose children attend
the Academy. The Commission member in question responded that the City Attorney had
advised there is no conflict of interest involved.
Mary Knutson, 1930 Oak Glen Trail, said a future expansion of the parking lot would go directly
between three homes and the pond and would affect property values.
Sue Johnson, 1940 Oak Glen Trail, said she had grave concerns regarding the parking lot,
which she called a "huge eyesore." She stated there is not enough space, even with a future
expansion, to accommodate parking for students and staff of a 1000-student school. She also
spoke of runoff issues and a concern about traffic, noting that the intersection of Neal and
McKusick is especially treacherous in the winter. She also called for another traffic study by an
unbiased source.
Tom Kramer, 2030 Oak Glen Trail, pointed out the site in question is private property and will be
developed at some point. He stated he was in favor of a school because he feels it would be a
better option for the use of the site.
Joe Kiolbasa, 1920 Oak Glen Trail, pointed out that according to the Comprehensive Plan,
annexation of this site is not supposed to occur until 2015. He noted that the new Millbrook
development is under way and will have a "huge" impact on traffic and other issues. He
suggested the site in question would be better able to handle a housing development than a
1,000-student school. He stated he thought the proposal would be a nuisance and detriment to
the neighborhood and asked the Commission to stay with the original Comprehensive Plan until
the impact of Millbrook is determined.
Andy DuPlessis, 1911, Oak Glen Place, expressed a concern about the possible impact on
what folks have strived a whole lifetime to achieve. He stated he was unaware of the proposal
until just a week before the meeting.
Tom Gabriel, 1985 Oak Glen Trail, spoke of his experience as a police officer regarding
schools. He stated in addition to accidents, schools generate complaints about overflow parking,
litter and noise. He called for a non-biased impact study, and he stated he thought it would be
wrong to have a school in this close a proximity to any residential area.
Don Fair, 1861 Heifort Court, stated there will not be enough parking when proud parents show
up for school events. He also spoke of the potential for light pollution.
Dennis Uppman, 1965 Oak Glen Trail, said 19 acres is not enough for a school. He mentioned
changing plans to move the school to the north of the property.
Nancy Kiolbasa, 1920 Oak Glen Trail, questioned the financial feasibility of the project, noting
that it is not unheard of for charter schools to go "belly up."
•
• City of Stillwater
Planning Commission
June 11, 2007
Bob Kroening, 1923 Swenson St., stated his biggest concern was with traffic and said he was
not certain enough study had been done regarding the traffic impact.
No other comments were received, and the hearing was closed.
The applicant was given an opportunity to respond to comments/concerns. The consultant from
Wenck Associates who prepared the traffic impact study reviewed the results of that study
which found that all affected intersections will operate at acceptable levels of service. He noted
the recommendations include the paving of Neal Avenue, the installation of a bypass lane on
Highway 96 and widening of the exit from the school. He stated that development of a traffic
management plan would be important and strongly encouraged development of such a plan as
part of the project. In response to a question by Mr. Kalmon, he stated the study was paid for by
the school but was required by the City and reviewed by the City.
Regarding environmental concerns, Mr. Kodet stated they will be working with the Watershed
District and will adhere to the highest environmental standards. He stated the school will have
its own generator, and he stated it will be possible to landscape/berm to provide a visual barrier.
He said lighting will be restricted to the site. And, he said they would develop a traffic
management plan as suggested by the traffic consultant. He also addressed parking. He said
80 parking spaces will be provided in the first phase, with the ability to provide an additional 50
spaces on the edge of the playing fields; that number can be doubled if need be, he said.
Mr. Gutierrez addressed comments about the financial feasibility of the project. He explained
state funding of charter schools. He stated that while some charter schools clearly over estimate
their number of students, they have a waiting list of students. He noted that financial projections
do not include any federal funding. He spoke of the school's mission of academics, character
and leadership.
Mr. Kalmon and Mr. Wolden asked whether they are any requirements for the size of a school
site. Mr. Kodet responded that this site is acceptable if not large for the type of school
programming proposed. Mr. Gutierrez pointed out that guidelines relate to square footage of
buildings, rather than the size of a site. Mr. Kalmon asked if there would be any further process
for public input. Mr. Kodet said they would incorporate comments made at this meeting and
have a follow-up public meeting with neighbors.
Mr. Dahlquist questioned why the process involved a special use permit, rather than a PUD and
development agreement. Mr. Turnblad explained that generally the PUD process involves
mixed-use developments, such as Rutherford School and Liberty on the Lake.
Mr. Milbrandt said the first question to be addressed is that of annexation, and he suggested
that the City is in no way prepared to annex this site at this time. He noted that a month ago, the
Commission denied a 42-home development due to traffic issues. It's not a matter of use, he
said, it is a matter of not being prepared to annex at this time.
Mr. Middleton pointed out there has been a lot of discussion about development in the
northwest quadrant of the City, and the need to complete the Comprehensive Plan before any
more development. He agreed this is not an issue of school use, it's an issue of where the City
City of Stillwater
Planning Commission
June 11, 2007
is with its Comprehensive Planning process. Mr. Kalmon agreed the school is a good applicant,
but the Comprehensive Plan ought to be completed before annexation.
Mr. Dahlquist noted this request is different than a housing development. He suggested that the
amount of traffic generated may be of the same magnitude as the Millbrook development and
he questioned whether the City was prepared to handle that at the location in question. He said
this may be the best location for a school, but he said that needs to be addressed in the
Comprehensive Plan. He noted that schools involve emotional issues, and he said all the
elements need to be addressed so it is done right.
Ms. Block stated she was "saddened" by having her intentions as a volunteer member of the
Planning Commission questioned. She noted that any traffic will impact her greatly as she lives
on Neal Avenue. However, she stated she thinks the school is a good fit for the site. And she
said she would make her decision based on facts, based on what's best for the community and
what's best for the school.
Mr. Milbrandt moved to deny Case No. 07-31. Mr. Kalmon seconded the motion. Motion passed
5-2, with Mr. Peroceschi and Ms. Block voting against denial. Mr. Turnblad pointed out the
request for annexation will go before the Joint Board on June 20, with the whole package to go
before the City Council on July 3.
i Case No. 07-33 A variance request to the minimum lot size requirements for construction of an
addition and garage at 907 Sixth Ave. S. in the RA, Single Family Residential District. River
Valley Restoration, representing Amy and Sean McDonough, applicant,
The applicants were present. Mr. Pogge reviewed the request and findings in favor of the
variance. He noted the HPC has given preliminary approval for the demolition of an old garage
on the site.
Mr. Middleton opened the public hearing. No comments were received, and the hearing was
closed. Mr. Peroceschi, seconded by Mr. Kalmon, moved approval as conditioned. Motion
passed unanimously.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:50 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Sharon Baker
Recording Secretary
0