Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-05-11 CPC MINCity of Stillwater Planning Commission May 11, 2009 Present: Chair Middleton, Suzanne Block, Robert Gag, Dan Kalmon, Mike Kocon, John Malsam, Scott Spisak and Charles Wolden Staff present: Planner Mike Pogge and Community Development Director Bill Turnblad Chair Middleton called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. Approval of minutes: Mr. Malsam, seconded by Mr. Gag, moved approval of the minutes of April 16, 2009. Motion passed 7-0, with Mr. Kocon abstaining. OPEN FORUM PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. 09-09 A variance request for construction of a 16'x26' attached garage at 2018 Broadway St. N. in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Jack Diethert, applicant. The applicant was not present. Mr. Pogge reviewed the request and staff findings. He noted that the request meets the three criteria necessary for the granting of a variance and staff recommends approval with one condition. Mr. Middleton opened the public hearing. No comments were received, and the hearing was closed. Mr. Wolden pointed out the request meets side yard setbacks and impervious surface coverage despite being on a non-conforming lot and moved approval as presented and conditioned. Mr. Malsam seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Case No.09-10 A variance to the parking regulations and an amendment to a special use permit for construction of a 3-story building at 109 N. Second St. in the CBD, Central Business District. Richard Anderson, applicant. The applicant was present. Community Development Director Turnblad reviewed the proposal and noted the design was approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission. He also noted the proposal meets zoning requirements such as height, setbacks, and impervious coverage. The plan does not meet parking requirements; however, he noted the development agreement for the parking ramp includes a provision allowing for construction of a banquet facility at the site in question, and in the Downtown Parking District, it is allowable to meet parking requirements by arrangements other than on-site parking. He concluded that approval is recommended with the conditions as listed in the staff report. Mr. Middleton asked about the parking permits for the new parking ramp. Mr. Turnblad stated the Downtown Parking Commission is still working on the details, but he reviewed the possible types of permits that will be available. Mr. Turnblad said a spread sheet of space uses has been prepared, and there remains a "healthy number" of spaces the City would still like to sell. Mr. Middleton said with the number of new construction projects going on in the area, he wants to be sure there are enough public spaces available; Mr. Turnblad assured the Commission that would be the case, noting that currently about half the spaces would still be available even if there is a moderately aggressive sale of spaces to local businesses. Mr. Gag asked why an amended special use permit is required, when the proposal involves the same use as the current use; Mr. Turnblad responded that whenever a use is expanded, the special use permit City of Stillwater Planning Commission May 11, 2009 needs to be amended, and he noted that banquet use is a bit different than restaurant use. Mr. Spisak asked about the arrangement between the Lowell Inn and the parking ramp development. Mr. Turnblad reviewed the parking ramp development agreement provisions that pertain to the Lowell Inn, as well as the physical connections linking the ramp to the Lowell Inn facility. Mr. Kocon asked how handicapped parking will be accommodated; Mr. Turnblad stated the Lowell Inn currently has handicapped spots on the street, and there will be 2-4 designated handicapped spots located near the elevator tower on each floor in the ramp. Mr. Spisak asked about the provision for trash enclosures; Mr. Turnblad explained how Mr. Anderson intends to meet that requirement. Mr. Middleton opened the public hearing. No comments were received, and the hearing was closed. Mr. Gag noted that plans seem to be in line with what has been anticipated regarding the Lowell Inn expansion, suggesting that the use fits and parking requirements can be met, and moved approval as conditioned. Mr. Kocon seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Case No. 09-11 A variance request for construction of a porch at 805 Fifth St. S. in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Gregg Carlsen, applicant. The applicant was present. Mr. Turnblad reviewed the request and staff findings. He pointed out the impervious surface coverage will be reduced in this proposal, but because this is a non- conforming lot, surface coverage will still be above what is allowable; a rain garden is proposed to mitigate the storm water runoff. Mr. Kocon asked about the placement of the rain garden, whether that is determined by the watershed district; Mr. Turnblad stated that is done by City engineering staff in collaboration with the responsible watershed agency. The applicant stated the house has had some moisture problems in the basement and this is an attempt to solve that problem, as well as improve the aesthetics of the home. Mr. Middleton opened the public hearing. No comments were received, and the hearing was closed. Mr. Kocon asked the applicant about changes to the roofline of the house; Mr. Carlsen explained that change. Ms. Block moved approval as conditioned. Mr. Kalmon seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Case No. 09-13 A variance to the setback and height regulations for construction of an office building at 107 Third St. N. in the PA, Public Administration, and CBD, Central Business District. Michael Monn, HAF Architects, representing Trinity Lutheran Church, applicants. Present representing the applicant were a representative of Trinity Lutheran Church, and Michael Monn. Mr. Pogge reviewed the requested variances and staff findings. He noted the property is split into two zoning districts, CBD on the southern portion and PA on the northern portion. He stated approval of the three variances is recommended with 13 conditions as listed in the staff report. Ms. Block asked expressed a concern about the loss of the previously free parking spaces due to the parking ramp project and asked whether there is a provision to make up for those free spaces in the ramp; Mr. Pogge noted a number of free spaces will be available in the ramp, but stated he was unsure whether they would be limited to three hours, as is the practice elsewhere 2 City of Stillwater Planning Commission May 11, 2009 in the downtown. Mr. Wolden asked about the flow of traffic and the location of drive-up mailboxes. Mr. Pogge reviewed the traffic circulation and the location of the postal drop boxes; a representative of Trinity Lutheran Church reviewed the location of one-way and two-way traffic patterns. Mr. Gag asked about the Heritage Preservation Commission review; Mr. Pogge responded the HPC added several conditions and approved only the foundation footprint, pending additional information regarding lighting plans, materials, and colors. Mr. Spisak asked about retaining walls that go over the east property line; Mr. Monn explained there is an agreement with the adjoining property owner for construction of the retaining wall and shared terrace area and the adjoining owner is in complete agreement with the proposal. Mr. Kalmon asked about the condition regarding the possibility of a second entrance to the Post Office; Mr. Pogge stated the HPC asked that this be looked into due to a concern about the prominence of the tower feature and the appearance this is the main entrance to the building and the Post Office. Mr. Pogge said if the second entrance is not possible, the HPC suggested perhaps moving the tower feature to the north or lessening the tower's appearance on the building. The Trinity Church representative stated the Post Office has agreed to a second entrance so there will be modifications to allow entrance to the Post Office from the building lobby area. Mr. Gag asked about the reason for the prominence of the tower feature; Mr. Monn explained it is due to aesthetics as well as the provision of a mezzanine space so it is a functioning architectural piece. Mr. Middleton opened the public hearing. Richard Kilty asked about plans for the existing postal building; the applicants responded that is undetermined at this point. Mr. Turnblad pointed out when reuse of the building does occur, the plans will have to go through the same process as a new development. No other comments were heard, and the hearing was closed. Ms. Block asked about the style of architecture; Mr. Monn said the intent was not to utilize a particular style but to complement and respect some of features of the adjacent buildings. Ms. Block suggested the building plans follow the guidelines of the Comprehensive Plan and downtown design guidelines. Mr. Spisak said he was comfortable with the setbacks and parking provisions but suggested a condition be added clarifying the circulation patterns will be as stated at this meeting and also said he had a problem with the height variance; he wondered whether the Commission should be acting at this time, given the outstanding issues remaining with the HPC. Mr. Gag agreed he would like to see the final product before taking action, saying he was still wrestling with the height variance. Mr. Pogge pointed out the issues the HPC looks at and the issues the Planning Commission looks at are very different and the real issues before the Planning Commission are non-design related. Mr. Middleton pointed out that conditions 11-13 cover the issues of concern to the HPC. Ms. Block suggested the tower adds to the building, despite the need for a variance; Mr. Pogge said if the height variance is of concern, it could be limited to the tower area. Mr. Kalmon asked about the view of the tower from the St. Croix River; Mr. Monn stated it won't be as prominent as the Trinity steeple; about 10-11 feet above the roofline will be visible from the River. Mr. Kocon said a height variance for the entire roof would be a different matter, but suggested the tower feature does make the building interesting, does reflect surrounding building features, and, as noted by Mr. Kalmon, is a usable space. On a question by Ms. Block, Mr. Monn stated this building would utilize green technology and the goal is to have the building lead certified. 3 City of Stillwater Planning Commission May 11, 2009 Mr. Kalmon moved to approve the variances as requested with the 13 conditions of approval and the additional condition limiting the height variance to the steeple/tower area only. Ms. Block seconded the motion. Mr. Wolden suggested major modifications come back to not only the HPC but also the Planning Commission. Mr. Kalmon amended his motion to reflect Mr. Wolden's suggestion that major modifications to the zoning use permit come back to the Planning Commission for review/approval. Ms. Block agreed to amend her second; amended motion passed unanimously. Case No. 09-15 A special use permit for a wireless antenna facility at 523 Marsh St. W. in the RB, Two Family Residential District. T-Mobile, Steve Carlson, applicant. Mr. Pogge reviewed the proposal and staff findings. He noted the proposal generally meets the eight requirements for the issuance of a special use permit for such a facility. In addition, the City contracted with an engineering firm to review the proposal, and the consulting engineer agreed with the need for the facility for T-Mobile's coverage and that the facility would have no adverse health or safety impacts. Mr. Pogge also noted that the general requirement to have antennas internally located in this instance would require the tower to be higher than allowable. Steve Carlson, T-Mobile, briefly spoke to measures being taken to minimize the impact of the externally-mounted antennas. Mr. Middleton opened the public hearing. Dan Smith, owner of KLBB radio, 114 S, Brick St., stated he had not had a lot of time to review the proposal; he said his main concern is with RF interference. Ms. Block asked if that concern is related to this proposal only or to any such facilities in the community. Mr. Smith stated potentially any antenna facility could impact the station. Mr. Spisak pointed out there is a note in the engineer's report that says a further study of possible pattern interference will need to be conducted for T-Mobile for the protection of the KLBB station. A representative of the consulting engineering firm stated the FCC has regulations in place that address this concern; he said no study is required for towers located more than one-half mile from an AM station. Mr. Wolden asked who is responsible for correcting any potential problem with interference; Mr. Carlson stated this is covered by the FCC rules and said correcting any problem would be T-Mobile's responsibility according to those rules. The consulting engineer addressed the definition of interference, in this case meaning structural interference, not radio interference, and stated he did not foresee any problem. Mr. Spisak pointed out that in March, the guidelines were changed to state that stealth towers are the preferred design in residential areas; Mr. Pogge pointed out the Council did not take action until May and this application was made before the new guidelines were adopted. Mr. Kocon noted that although the proposed tower is not a stealth tower, it will replace an existing light pole and not create another tower or visual obstacle in the neighborhood. Mr. Kocon moved to approve the requested special use permit as conditioned. Mr. Malsam seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Case No. 09-14 A special use permit for a wireless antenna facility at 1900 Myrtle St. W. in the RA, Single Family Residential District. AT&T Mobility and T-Mobile, Ken Nielsen and Steve Carlson, applicants. Mr. Carlson stated they had looked into tabling this request in light of looking further into the AM radio tower location. Mr. Pogge reviewed the request and said staff is recommending that this 4 City of Stillwater Planning Commission May 11, 2009 be tabled, in part because City code requires any request within one-half mile of another tower be studied for possible co-location with the existing tower. Mr. Pogge noted the KLBB tower is about one-quarter mile away from the proposed new location; he stated the KLBB tower is 50 years old and both T-Mobile and the engineering consultants believe it is not capable of accommodating the requested equipment. Mr. Pogge pointed out the engineering study states that T-Mobile could replace the KLBB tower as an alternative; however, he stated there are several aesthetic and technical issues that need to be considered should that alternative be pursued. Mr. Pogge pointed out that co-locating both AT&T and T-Mobile on the radio station tower affects RF interference between the radio station and the carriers requiring additional equipment; he also spoke to several potential safety issues. Aesthetic concerns Mr. Pogge spoke to included the required width of the tower, the number of cables, and the non-conformity of the existing tower. Mr. Pogge said staff has had some preliminary discussions with the station owner, Dan Smith, but staff would recommend tabling this request pending further discussions with the three parties. Mr. Kalmon said he would like to see some visual representation of how a new tower would impact the view coming east on Myrtle Street, which is a gateway to the City. Ms. Block also suggested a view across McKusick Lake would be helpful. Mr. Middleton opened the public hearing. Mr. Smith reiterated his comments made during the earlier case (09-15). No other comments were received, and the hearing was closed. The consulting engineer said while his report indicates that it may be possible to co-locate the wireless antennas with the AM tower, he said there are potential problems and it would be a complicated endeavor; he said in reality, technically, the AM tower will not be able to handle the co-locations Mr. Carlson said they feel comfortable that they meet the intent of the City ordinance with the application on the table, but would be OK with tabling the request so the City feels comfortable they are making the right decision. Ms. Block suggested with the explanation from the engineer and the potential safety problems, the Commission ought to vote on the proposal as presented. Mr. Gag said given the fact that Mr. Smith just received the proposal, it would be good to table for 30 days. Mr. Smith said he would like time to consult with engineers before a decision is made. Mr. Gag moved to table; Mr. Wolden seconded the motion. Motion passed 7-1, with Mr. Kalmon voting no, saying he would like to see more information regarding views as a gateway to the City and across Lake McKusick. Case No. 09-17 A special use permit request for the renovation of an existing duplex into an art and cultural center and variance to the parking regulations at 224 Fourth St. N. in the PA, Public Administration District. Brian Larson, Larson Brenner Architects, applicant. Brian Larson, representing ArtReach Alliance, was present. Mr. Turnblad reviewed the request and staff findings. He noted the use is allowable under the PA zoning district. The primary issue at this point, he said, is the need for a parking variance, noting that most of the required spaces could be accommodated in on-street parking. Mr. Middleton pointed out that the library's parking ramp has alleviated the parking needs for the immediate area, and said he had spoken with a nearby business owner who is fully in support of the project. 5 City of Stillwater Planning Commission May 11, 2009 Mr. Middleton opened the public hearing. No comments were received, and the hearing was closed. Mr. Gag, seconded by Mr. Kalmon, moved approval as conditioned. Motion passed unanimously. Case No. 09-16 Refinements to the draft 2030 Comprehensive Land Use Map. City of Stillwater, applicant. Mr. Turnblad reviewed the parcels in 13 areas that need to be refined to be consistent with the draft 2030 Comprehensive Plan and the recommended changes in the land use. Most of the changes were to institutional property, changing the guiding land use to be consistent with the surrounding neighborhood. In area C, pertaining to two parcels owned by Stillwater Country Club, Mr. Gag, seconded by Mr. Kalmon, moved to keep the parcels low/medium density residential rather than changing to park, recreation or open space. Motion passed unanimously. In area J, there was discussion regarding six parcels on Greeley south of Orleans, whether to designate the area as high density residential or medium density residential. Ms. Block suggested that given the location on Greeley, a high traffic volume road, it makes sense to designate it high density; it was consensus to designate high density as recommended. There also was discussion regarding the current gas station parcels at Curves Crest and Greeley whether to designate the property business park commercial or commercial. It was noted there is a mixture of uses in the area, but the anchor use is industrial; it was consensus to designate the use as industrial. There were no other votes taken; the Commission was in consensus with the recommended land use designations. Mr. Turnblad stated these changes would go to the Council at its next meeting and be forwarded to the Met Council along with the Comp Plan hopefully by the end of May. OTHER BUSINESS Review of agency comments on the draft 2030 Comprehensive Plan - Mr. Turnblad stated that all of the mandatory reviewing agencies have submitted comments, with a few courtesy reviews outstanding. He noted that all of the comments were included in the agenda packet, along with the City's response. Mr. Kalmon asked about the comment 2a from Brown's Creek Watershed District; Mr. Turnblad said he thought that request was overreaching. Mr. Kalmon said he thought the City should at least indicate it is aware of the problem and as new standards come out, the City will consider that in the engineering of its infrastructure. Mr. Turnblad noted that most of the comments were positive. Ms. Block acknowledged the efforts of Yvonne Klinnert, editor of the Courier News which has ceased publication. Ms. Block moved to adjourn at 10:35 p.m. Mr. Gag seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Respectfully submitted, Sharon Baker Recording Secretary 6