Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-09-14 CPC MIN PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES September 14, 2016 REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. Chairman Kocon called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. Present: Chairman Kocon, Commissioners Collins, Fletcher, Hade, Hansen, Kelly, Lauer and Siess; Councilmember Menikheim Absent: None Staff: City Planner Wittman APPROVAL OF MINUTES Possible approval of August 10, 2016 meeting minutes Motion by Commissioner Hade, seconded by Commissioner Collins, to approve the August 10, 2016 meeting minutes. Motion passed 8-0. OPEN FORUM There were no public comments. PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. 2016-31: A Variance to exceed maximum structural coverage in the RB two family district for the property located at 1305 Second Street South. Bernard and Mary Ellen Peltier, property owners. City Planner Wittman explained that Bernie and Mary Ellen Peltier are proposing the installation of a 624 square foot, 24’ X 26’ detached garage. The additional structural coverage proposed exceeds the 25% maximum allowed structural coverage. If approved, the total structural coverage on this 6,150 square foot lot would be 31%. The shed is proposed to be removed. Staff recommends conditional approval of a 6% variance to the 25% Maximum Lot Coverage. Commissioner Fletcher suggested requiring that the shed be removed as a condition of approval. Bernie Peltier, applicant, explained the project. They have owned the house for 58 years and have never had a garage. They would like to have shelter for their vehicles and tools. Chairman Kocon opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing was closed. Planning Commission September 14, 2016 Page 2 of 6 Motion by Commissioner Lauer, seconded by Commissioner Collins, to approve Case No. 2016-31, 6% variance to exceed maximum structural coverage for the property located at 1305 Second Street South, with the five conditions recommended by staff and the additional condition that the detached shed shall be removed no later than 30 days after construction of the garage. All in favor, 8-0. Case No. 2016-32: A Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment (Map) for the property located at the northeast corner of Manning Avenue North and Highway 36. Ryan Companies, owner representative. Crescent Development LLC, property owner. City Planner Wittman requested that the public hearing be opened and continued. Chairman Kocon opened the public hearing and continued the hearing to October 12, 2016. Case No. 2016-34: A Variance to the wetland buffer setback to construct a residential swimming pool on the property located at 3527 Eben Way. Kevin and Melissa Mueller, property owners. City Planner Wittman informed the Commission that Kevin and Melissa Mueller are requesting approval of a 53’ variance to the 100’ wetland buffer setback for the construction of a pool and related appurtenances. The property owners are proposing to locate the pool 50’ from the wetland and the pool deck is proposed to be located 47’ from the wetland. The proposed improvements, including the pool equipment, are located out of the established wetland conservation easement area. She further stated that in January 2016, the applicants inquired as to whether a pool could be installed in the rear yard of this property. This inquiry came before the City prior to the Muellers purchasing of the property. Staff advised the Muellers a pool could be installed as long as it was not located within the conservation easement area, and that it had to maintain a 50 foot buffer from the wetland. However, the buffer setback was increased by the Brown’s Creek Watershed District to 100 feet, which was missed by the staff person. On the basis the application is in harmony and intent of the zoning ordinance, consistent with the comprehensive plan, and the applicant has established practical difficulty, staff recommends conditional approval 53’ variance to the 100’ wetland setback for the construction of a in-ground swimming pool and pool appurtenances. Commissioner Fletcher asked if the Watershed District has reviewed the variance request. Ms. Wittman replied that the City normally doesn’t send variance requests to the Watershed District. Commissioner Fletcher asked if any consideration was given to angle the pool so the corner is no longer in the 50’ wetland area. Kevin Mueller, applicant, reviewed their interactions with City staff. They feel they tried to do everything right. They wanted to stay in the neighborhood and looked for a house capable of having a pool. Before purchasing the property they called the City and spoke to a staff member responsible for giving pool permits and they were told it was OK as long as they stayed out of the wetland conservation easement. They got this in writing. They then purchased the house and learned of the increase in the wetland buffer. Mr. Mueller presented supporting letters from neighbors, and said they also spoke to the Liberty Home Owners’ Association and got their approval. They feel their request is very reasonable. He voiced appreciation for City Planner Wittman’s report but he is asking the Commission to honor the City’s prior statement. He explained that the pool could not be pushed further back on the lot because the lot is wedge-shaped. He does not want to return to the Commission in the future asking for an amendment. Planning Commission September 14, 2016 Page 3 of 6 Chairman Kocon pointed out that the applicants are seeking a 53’ variance and questioned why not 50’. Mr. Mueller replied they were not told about any setback other than the conservation easement. They want leeway. He believes the site plan is accurate but wants to make sure he does not have to come back for a further variance. Commissioner Siess asked the reason for the additional 3’ on the 50’ setback. Mr. Mueller responded that it makes sense for the pool to be parallel to the house. They want adequate walkway for people to get around the pool and want the pool to be far enough from the house so their daughter does not walk out and go too close to the pool. Chairman Kocon acknowledged the City made a mistake but just because the staff person’s explanation is in writing, that doesn’t change the ordinance. However the Commission is willing to work with the applicants. Chairman Kocon opened the public hearing. James Parks, 3521 Eben Way, stated that he built his pool in 2004. He was surprised to hear tonight that the easement went from 50 to 100’. He feels the Muellers’ pool would be a great addition and it can be done beautifully. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Fletcher stated that she is aware of the changes the watershed district made in 2008. Even if it’s only intermittently wet, designated wetland serves an important function to keep local waters clean. City Planner Wittman added that there are different levels of wetland properties. This property is of a higher quality, that is why it has the 100’ setback. Lower quality wetlands have a smaller setback. Commissioner Collins asked if there is a way to move the west end of the pool over 3’. He feels the request is reasonable but would like to see the pool moved closer to the house to eliminate the need for the additional 3’. Chairman Kocon agreed. Commissioner Hansen acknowledged a variance will be needed no matter what. He feels it’s reasonable to build the pool as designed but would not support giving them another foot more. Commissioner Kelly recognized the applicant’s diligence in researching before building the pool. He feels the design is reasonable for the property and is not bothered by the 3’. Motion by Commissioner Hansen, seconded by Commissioner Lauer, to approve Case No. 2016-34, 53’ variance to the wetland buffer setback to construct a residential swimming pool on the property located at 3527 Eben Way, with the three conditions recommended by staff. Motion failed 4-4 with Commissioners Siess, Fletcher, Hade, and Chairman Kocon voting nay. Motion by Commissioner Collins, seconded by Commissioner Hade, to grant a 50’ variance to the wetland buffer setback to construct a residential swimming pool on the property located at 3527 Eben Way, with the three conditions recommended by staff, and the clarification that pool equipment may be located in the 50’ setback but no other portion of the pool or pool appurtenances may be within the setback area. Motion passed 6-2 with Commissioners Fletcher and Siess voting nay. Planning Commission September 14, 2016 Page 4 of 6 Case No. 2016-35: An amendment to a Special Use Permit for restaurant expansion at property located at 243 Main Street South. Mark Hanson, property owner. City Planner Wittman stated that Mark Hanson, representing Marx Restaurant, is requesting an amendment to Special Use Permit 2006-04 to allow for a 948 square foot expansion of the restaurant into the second story of the building. Two of the four rental units currently there are proposed to be removed and converted to restaurant and bar use. Staff finds that the proposed restaurant and bar expansion are in conformance with the SUP provisions and therefore recommends approval. Mark Hanson, applicant, explained that the capacity of the expansion will be around 30 people. Chairman Kocon opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing was closed. Motion by Commissioner Fletcher, seconded by Commissioner Hade, to approve Case No. 2016-35, amendment to a Special Use Permit for restaurant expansion at property located at 243 Main Street South, with the six conditions recommended by staff. All in favor, 8-0. Case No. 2016-36: A Variance to construct in the Front Yard Setback area on the property located at 209 Wilkins Street East. Mark Moelter, property owner. City Planner Wittman reviewed the request. Mark Moelter is requesting approval of a 7’ variance to the 20’ Front Yard Setback for the vertical expansion of the existing home located at 209 Wilkins Street East. The home was previously a one and a half-story home; the applicant is proposing a two- story home. The expansion has partially occurred; this request comes to the Planning Commission after the work has been started and the City has issued a Stop Work order. The vertical expansion was in violation of the zoning code. The Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) denied the demolition permit and is forwarding the case to the City Council, asking the Council to cite the property owner and seeking direction about whether it should be determined to be an infill application. On the basis that the plight of the applicant is due to circumstances created by the landowner and that the essential character of the neighborhood has already been altered, staff recommends denial of the application. John Koch of Arden Hills stated he is the new contractor representing the applicant. Commissioner Siess asked if the applicant has thoughts or arguments as to why they need the second story. Mr. Koch responded that a lot of work was done that the owner was not aware of. After the Stop Work order, the owner asked him to step in and help finish the project. Commissioner Kelly asked if there would be room to build behind where the structure is currently located to meet setbacks. Mr. Koch replied he did not think so. Chairman Kocon opened the public hearing. Myrlah Olson, 1019 North Second Street, said the project has been going on for a year and a half and it’s a mess. They are really looking forward to having the applicants in the neighborhood and want them to complete the project according to the original plan of a story and a half. Planning Commission September 14, 2016 Page 5 of 6 Kurt Zaworski, 1024 North First Street, said that currently, the expansion is 5’ away from his property. He is concerned that the limestone wall which is the property line is not in good shape and if anything happens to the wall it will tumble into his backyard. If the applicants really want an expansion, he feels it should be in the backyard. He observed that the applicants are not maintaining the property during construction. Jason Mattox, 1106 Second Street North, said the house is too tall and completely out of character with the neighborhood. He understands that the property owners have no plans to live in Stillwater after it’s constructed. He is concerned about what it will look like in the future. Joe Samuelson, 1019 North Second Street, asked about the role of the Commission. He believes in public civility and city government but it appears the system has failed. Chairman Kocon pointed out that what is before the commission is whether to grant the variance to make it a two-story building or have it remain a story and a half. Shirley Zaworski, 1024 North First Street, voiced concern that they were never notified of plans for the new building. They were shocked when the applicant started building, that it was going up so high. They feel they deserved a little bit better consideration after living in their home since 1971. City Planner Wittman reiterated that much of the work was done illegally. She stated that neighbors should have received notification of last week’s HPC public hearing on the demolition request. The Planning Commission considers only the variance. The goal of this process is to try to move the project back toward compliance. The public hearing was closed. City Planner Wittman reviewed the history of the project. A building permit was submitted for interior renovation of the existing structure and the addition on the side. No variance, public hearing, or HPC approval was required because the small addition would have been in conformance with the sideyard setback. After the City recognized the contractor had worked far outside the scope of the permit, a Stop Work order was issued. The plans submitted to the City after the fact did not represent what was on site at that time. It is the vertical expansion of this portion of the existing residence that is up for the Commission’s consideration tonight. The HPC reviewed the design of the structure last week, and voted to deny the illegal demolition, recognizing that it was an after the fact request that shouldn’t be allowed to proceed without previous approval. Commissioner Hansen acknowledged the neighbors’ right to speak their mind before the Commission. He agreed that it would have been great had the City discovered it sooner but unfortunately the City does not have the staff to go out and discover these things. Motion by Commissioner Hansen, seconded by Commissioner Collins, to deny Case No. 2016-36, variance to construct in the front yard setback area on the property located at 209 Wilkins Street East. All in favor, 8-0. NEW BUSINESS Planning Committees Representation Planning Commission September 14, 2016 Page 6 of 6 City Planner Wittman confirmed Commissioners volunteering to serve on various committees. STAFF UPDATES Backflow Preventers Inquiry In response to an inquiry from Commissioner Kelly at the last meeting, City Planner Wittman provided the Commission with a Fact Sheet and web site. She stated it is her understanding these regulations have been in place for more than one year. However, there may be companies that have become certified to test and are now seeking business in Stillwater. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Siess, seconded by Commissioner Hansen, to adjourn the meeting at 8:55 p.m. All in favor, 8-0. Respectfully Submitted, Julie Kink Recording Secretary