Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1970-07-27 CPC MIN �.+Y MINUTES OF THE STILLWATER PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 27, 1970 Special Meeting 7 :30 P. M. The special meeting of the Stillwater Planning and Zoning Commission: called for 7 :30 P. M. , July 27, 1970, was attended by: Duane Arndt, Chairman Harold Hohlt Sidney Wihren John Condon Myron Melstrom The meeting was called to order by Chairman Arndt. First Item: Case 084 - Petition of Roy Schmoeckel for rezoning of property at 114 East Chestnut Street. Mr. Schmoeckel presented a drawing and explained his plans for the old house located at 114 E. Chestnut Street; he stated that the original petition was for four apartments, it was then changed to three, and was now down to a request for a duplex. Mr. Arndt: It is in a commercial property area; under the present ordinance we haveto rezone it to Two-Family - it would be a spot zone, and there are no other variances required. Mr. Schmoeckel: The way it stands now, it can stay in the state of original occupancy. Following a brief discussion regarding requirements which have been met, Mr. Arndt thanked the Schmoeckels for attending the meeting, and stated that the Commission would take action on the matter later in the evening. (see page 10) . Second Item: Matter of rezoning property at top of Main Street Stairs. HEARING: Mr. Arndt: I will state the ground rules; we are primarily concerned with land use - whether or not rezoning should be done regarding land use. . . it is now zoned Multi-Family District. Mr. Condon: I feel that my property is involved in this and I may have tri disqualify myself. Also, I don' t know what the petition is. -2- Mr. Arndt: The petition is by property owners in the area requesting that the City Council rezone the area to something other than the present zoning. The area is not specifically referred to - I would like ,'to find out what these people are interested in. Does anyone knowhow big the area is? If Mr. Condon would disqualify himself, there would not be a quorum; this meeting is simply to receive information; we will not vote on anything tonight. M r 3 . J ohII Tr1-4-e 322 South Broadway Street The area involved is from the top of the Main Street Stairs southward to Walnut; Second Street eastward to the bluff above Main Street. We are talking about land use and I will try to keep my remarks to this subject - land use, how the land has been used, how it will be used. Within this area I defined there are twenty-three houses; and one church which is not being used. Of these twenty-three houses, presently zoned Multi-Family, there are four duplexes, one triplex and eighteen one-family homes; 78% of the homes in that area are one-family; twenty of them are owned by people who reside in those homes. Twenty-two of the twenty-three home owners (actually twenty- one homeowners, as one person owns two houses) live in that area - 96%. Of these twenty-one home owners, seventeen signed a petition to have it rezoned from the way it' s presently zoned to one or two family houses; three-fourths of the people who live in that area request- that the Commission rezone. That area has been zoned Multi-Family since the zoning ordinance went into effect - it has undergone significant changes - a rebirth; the change has gone about in the way the property is being used for residential purposes.. Since 1963, fourteen houses have been sold to people with young children - it is a very stable neighborhood - this is what you have in this particular area right now. In the last ten years it has changed from an older neighborhood to a younger one - {J young homeowners . People have remodeled and have taken care of their yards, the tax base has increased, the city is better off. It ' s an historic neighborhood; a couple houses are historic homes of Minnesota. I would like to see the neighborhood remain as it now is. I am wondering, if we are to have three and four dwellings per lot, could the water lines and sewer lines in that area accomodate an increase? In order to get in or out of the area, people must go down Pine Street - two cars per dwelling and there would be increased traffic through these streets - it would cause more noise and more confusion. A blanket designation was given to this area - the time may come when we may want to reappraise. We are talking about people - how they use the land - it ' s people that make Stillwater the town that it is. However this classification was made up - there seems to be incon- sistency in the zoning ordinance; page 33, for instance, states " . . . no apartment building shall be located on a lot of less than 7, 500 square feet, which lot shall be of sufficient width to allow an average of 75 feet for each building" . It ' s impossible to put an apartment house on these lots. We request that you give serious thought to this petition. -3- Mr. Arndt: Does anyone else wish to speak? Mr. Condon 437 South Second Street I feel that if this property is rezoned I will suffer financial loss. I note also that most of the families we are talking about have moved in since the zoning - they should have moved in in full knowledge of the zoning. Also, since their lots are not big enough for apart- ment houses they're saying, ' if I can't have it, you can't have it. ' When a man buys a piece of property he has a right to know that there is some stability to the zoning. We have a zoning ordinance - a lot of people have taken actions based on that ordinance. If we change that ordinance capriciously we will be back to where there wasn't an ordinance - where buildings could be put up in any area. B_.. J. _McPherson:, 527 South Broadway I am a newcomer up there; I have been there over seventy-five years and I like it the way it is; let ' s try to keep it that way. Mrs. True: Mr. Condon said that it has been zoned Multi-Family all along, but I think we are talking about people, about homes, about life styles; we 're not talking about trying to make a 'buck at the expense of the neighbors. This was zoned Multi-Family - was the zoning based upon a land use map? Did they really know what the land use was? Mr. Arndt: "Yes. Mrs. True: Mr. Condon spoke about the capricious changes; I think it was capricious that it was zoned Multi-Family to begin with. I would like to see a copy of the plan. . . Mr. Arndt: I have a copy of the Comprehensive Plan available. Mr. Tom Lammers 437 South Broadway Over 50% of the people in the neighborhood expressed a desire for rezoning - you should give favorable consideration to the majority in this country. Mr. Arndt: The Planning and Zoning Commission is not interested in these people who signed that petition but in the best interests of the City of Stillwater. The zoning map was adapted with the idea that it was the best zoning under the then existing conditions of the City of Stillwater. I know you would like to see it changed, but that does not mean that that change is in the best interests of the whole city- the Planning Commission is interested in the whole city, n o'.I �:a tIv i s particular area. We have not heard any evidence at this time that would let the Planning Commission at this time change the zoning map. Mrs. True: What wuuld you consider to be evidence? Mr. Arndt: Population pressures, school densities, sewers, traffic. The Planning Commission is aware of them, but originally this area was -4- zoned in a specific way and we have to rely on the . fact that eight years ago it was a good job. June Lammers 435 South Broadway Eight years ago we didn't have a problem of apartment buildings - I think we should create an area for just apartment buildings. Already there is a traffic problem there on the corner with the Junior High School and the young children - we have to think of the future . Mr. Tom Lammers: Times have changed; I think we have to look at the present - not go ten years back. The neighborhood has changed - there are problems that were not in existence eight or ten years ago. You have to consider the needs of people in certain areas. Mr. Byron Torgerson South Broadway Street I would like to know of the Planning Commission - and you are experts, supposedly - what is the very best use for said area? Mr. Arndt: We are not experts - merely citizens like the rest of you. Not a person here would pretend to be an expert. The plan was adopted at the behest of the City Council by urban planners. 1,7e have no information at this point as to whether the land use should be changed or not; we will attempt to get some information. Gene Lammers South Broadway Street I talked to you a couple weeks ago - you knew what the idea was; you must have known this thing was coming up. You said to get a petition it 's not here tonight; where is the petition? Mr. Arndt: I have not seen the petition you are referring to. It was referred to me via a letter either from Mr. Kimmel or the City Clerk' s office, but I did not receive the petition. Mr. Melstrom left the meeting at this point to ask Mr. 'Brower, City Administrator, for a copy of the petition in question. (Mr. Brower was attending a Council Meeting elsewhere in the building) . Mrs. Tom Lammers: One block away is a Two-Family District. Mr. Arndt: Is there sewer in your area? Mrs. Lammers: Yes. Mr. Arndt: How far does it go? Mr. John True: Our sewer is privately maintained until it reaches the foot of Second Street. Mr. Arndt: If the area ever has to be resewered it would force all of you to out. -5- Mrs. Tom Lammers : There is no sewer or water there in the property. (Apartment house site) . Mr. True : Are you indicating that the multiple dwelling unit would require resewering? Mr. Arndt: If you are talking about having to put sewer somewhere in the area at some future date, the only land use that could pay for that is single family dwelling. Mrs. True : Mr. Shelton should answer whether or not the area could stand the increase. (Mr. Shelton was not in attendance) . Mr. Arndt: If your area does not meet requirements (of the Metropolitan Pollution Control commission) you may have to have a new sewer put in. Mrs. Tom Lammers: Where does this tie in with the apartments? Mr. Arndt: They (planners) probably forsaw that this was going to take place ; this sewer businessuestion Q probably was a factor in the drawing of the zoning map. Mr. Gene Lammers: You said that you didn 't want the change unless it ' s going to be for the betterment of the whole city - you could go along on every block and do that! Mr. Arndt: I am referring to the basis of land use . Mrs. Tom Lammers: Could we get remarks from the other members? Mr. Wihren: We are running out of land in Stillwater. Mr. Tom Lammers: Why have one little corner of a block there? Mr. Arndt: We are concerned with rezoning of the whole area, not one small block. Mr. Wihren: If you owned the land and wanted to build an apartment house and rent it, would you not build the apartment house? Mr. Tom Lammers : I would not build the apartment house. Mr. Wihren: You sound like the apartment house would deteriorate the neighborhood. Mr. Tom Lammers: I think it would. At this point Mr. Melstrom returned to the meeting with the petition. Mr. Arndt: At a meeting of the Planning Commission of June 22, 1970, the Planning Cozmission indicated to the City Council that we did not have a petition on this matter and, based on information we had informally brought to us by the Building Inspector, we did not have any jurisdiction in the matter. On June 25th a letter was referred to me but unfortunately I never received a copy of the petition. Mr. Tom Lammers: Will you give the signed petition and the remarks contained therein some consideration? May we be advised as to any -6- future Planning Commission meetings where this may be brought up? 11,1r. Arndt: You may stay - we, have another item on the agenda tonight, some revisions of the ordinance, but we have no intentions of voting tonight. The Planning Cor,=-ission will not make a recommendation tonight; we do not have a sufficient amount of information at this point. Mr. Gene Lammers: What do you need? Mr. Arndt: You have the burden of persuading the Planning Commission that we should rezone it. Mrs. True: When may we again petition the Commission to present evidence? Mr. Arndt: If you want to designate one ofyour1V I can contact him whenever this is going to be discussed. Mr. Torgerson: We still don't know what the best land use for that area is, do we?.' This land is very close to the downtown area so it ' s important to city planning; IuDuld like to know what that plan made up eight years ago said the best use was. Mrs. True: Would you please give your operational definition of "best"? Mr. Arndt: We are talking about the land use - there is a limited quantity of something called land - to be used in the best interests of the entire community. Mrs. Tom Lammers: Somewhere. it said all structures should conform within the area. Mr S F. B. Castle 501 S . Second Street You said to keep the whole town in mind, but I am asking you - if these people feel that the area should be changed, is that the only argument you have against it is that the town could make better use of it the way it is? Mr. Arndt: I would prefer not to say anything further. Mr. Hohlt: We inherited this zoning area; it has been zoned ��ult , Dwelling and up until now no one has said anythinut �vaniting itg abo changed. Just as much as people s1nould be protected -'-n a. lj si,lgle family area, those buying in a multi-family 4 too. i--family area should be protected Mr. Tom Lammers : Why should we have our property deteriorated by an apartment house? Mr. Hohlt: It was zoned for that. .Mr. I think you are wrong when you say deterioration of the pr op e r t y. Mr. Gene LarT�.mers: You are talking about overpopulation - in a little squ,--.are area like that. You can figure on two cars per family. MX. V7..,J-hren: Our job is to make the land available . -7- Mr. Tom Lammers : We deserve a hearing. Mrs. Tom Lammers : Last year we went through this. Mr. Hodne (urban planner) said, never should an apartment go in that area because of the density of the population; we have a copy of that letter here tonight. Mr. Gene Lammers: You are talking about an apartment building - that' s overpopulation any way you slice it up! Mr. Arndt: If that property were not rezoned, any structure that would go up would have to comply with the ordinance. The point is, we have a petition for rezoning here and we will give it considera- tion. Mrs. True: I would beg for you to consider what we have there now - a stable, growing neighborhood. You are talking about betterment of the community; you cannot beat a stable neighborhood. Mr. Tom Lammers: Mrs. True gave a very comprehensive talk - you should give her remarks very careful consideration and that 's all we ask. We have presented our questions and I would only ask that you consider our remarks. We want a fair consideration. Mr. Arndt: I can assure you, you will have that. Mr. Castle: The majority wishes a change and you can find no reason for it not to be done, then why not have it done? Let 's see if there are any reasons for not doing it? Mr. Condon: The burden of proof lies with you, not with us. The zoning ordinance was done with some idea that it was for the betterment of the whole co 'unity. Mr. Gene Lammers : You are talking about changes - if this apartment building had come up they might have got a little excited about it ten years ago. Mr. Melstrom: I did sit on the Planning Commission at the time these ordinances were passed. At that time, too, we had our pro- fessional planner, Mr. Hodne; he felt that area was adaptable for multiple dwellings and that ' s the way it was set up. When it was suggested that a large complex be put up -there it was overruled; I believe it was suggested at that time that the people in the area come in with a petition to rezone. There was a change of plans up there (in apartment house size, etc.) and the inspector stated that no variances are required. After the permit was issued the petition came in - now we have a problem. The plans meet all requirements. At this point Mr. Kimmel, City Attorney, asked Mr. Melstrom to join the city council meeting in progress downstairs as he was needed to vote on a matter. At the same time, Mr. Kimmel said that as of a couple of weeks ago the building permit for the apartment house was issued. Mr. Melstrom said he would check on the matter and report back. June Lammers: we didn't know- it was zoned Multiple-Dwelling ing when we purchased our property, nor did we think it was. There were no vacant lots. Mr. Arndt: You are assumed to know the law; ignorance is no excuse. -8- very few people ever ask about zoning. . . Mr. Tom Lammers : You fellows are serving on the Commission; I have been to the Commission before and have never seen more than four here at a time; is there a lack of interest? What ' s the matter with the resin of the people? Mr. Hohlt: This is a special meeting - some of the members are out of town, etc. If it were a regular meeting they all try to make it. Let me clarify something; the plan for the apartment house that came before us - I think I said there is no more use to bring it before us, then it went to the Council and they referred it back to us. Can you understand our position? This is a Multiple-Dwelling Area - an application comes in for a multiple dwelling house there and there 's nothing we can do about it. Mr. Wihren: They do have the permit. Mr. Tom Lammers: We came here with the understanding that there was no permit issued. We go out and get a petition and it hasn' t reached your chairman until tonight! We are asking you to listen to someone else; don't just listen to a couple guys who want to build an apart- ment when you have a whole group here. Mr. Wihren: All we do is recommend to the City Council. Mr. Tom Lammers: Has the building permit been issued? Mr. Melstrom returned to the meeting at this time. Mr. Melstrom: Mr. Brower just told me, yes. When asked the date the permit was issued, Mr. Melstrom stated he wasn't sure and decided to go back to Mr. Brower and check. Mr. Tom Lammers: Which takes precedence? The petition for rezoning or the permit? You have the petition tonight; where did you have to go to get it? Mr. Arndt: Mr. Brower 's office. Mrs. Tom Lammers : The date of the permit certainly has something to do with the date of the petition. Mr. Tom Lammers : There 's no use arguing - let 's wait until Mr. Melstrom comes back. I don't think any of you knew whetter a permit had been issued. %ir. Arndt: The petition for rezoning can still stand because you may still want to have it rezoned; we are not concerned with only this small area. What about other areas where someone may want to come in and buy? Mrs. Tom Lam.-hers: The rest of Broadway is zoned residential except for this one block we are talking about. Mr. Castle: I think it would certainly tie in with this qu estion - the validity of the 1958 zoning. -9- Mr. Tom Lammers : You aren ' t aware of our problems unless we bring them to you. Taxpayers deserve to be listened to. I can't under- stand where that Petition has been all this time. Mrs. Tom Lammers: Its been buried for five weeks! Mr. Mei-strom returned and stated that the building permit for the apartment house had been issued on July 21, 1970. Mr. Arndt: issued by john Shelton, Building Inspector. 'V-Vle will have to have an opinion from the city attorney. ,Mr. Tom Lammers : It becomes a legal matter now? Mr. Arndt: I think perhaps it does. The delegation left; Mrs. True returned for a minute to ask for a copy of the Master Plan® which she received. Third Item: Revisions of Zoning ordinance #383 discussed. 4 Mr. Arndt: You should have received copies of Proposed ordinance changes. we had a motion to have all multiple dwelling units come in under special use and we passed a resolution to that effect. L First of all our present ordinance makes it impossible for putting in Planned unit developments, town houses and apartment- buildings or multi-family dwellings in any area except residential 'areas. I propose we take a look at our present zoning ordinance and what changes we should make. Mr. Kir, qel said we should transmit our ideas to him and he will put them into legal form for us. It is my recommendation that we permit multi-family dwellings (three or four or more units) in all districts except industrial on a special use permit. If Multi-family gets to close to Industrial we can stop it. We can write into the zoning map a commercial area Where no special permitted uses would be permitted. we can put minimum requirements on any special Multi-Family Dwelling unit - has to conform with minimum reauirements. Designate certain Single Family_Lly Districts where you can have multi-family dwellings and certain areas where you cannot. Mr. Hohlt: I would like some firm protection for people who want to be in a single family area. Mr. .Arndt'-__.- You can' t do that, Harold. . . . . if we -take special perm" L_ 4 _Ltted use we abolish Multi-Fami_L tDistrict®, 'y Districts as a DisWe would el.iminate it as a zoning map classification. Mr. Condon: I would like the Co-m4 amnI , _ssion to see plans of all multi- - _Fi J_y houses come before them; we could influence them - architectural control-. I wonder if it wouldn't get it back to the case where we don' t have any zoning and it depends on who' s a friend of who. _10- Other changes recommended (or discussed) 1. SECTION 19. (Building Height Limits) 35 ' maximum except under special permitted use. Also, designate where height shall. be measured from. 2. In all districts, specifically residential, examine permitted uses. 3. SECTION 11. (one-Family Districts) Delete, "public or private elementary schools" except under special permitted use. Define "professional person" more clearly - possibly adding more categories such as beauticians, barbers, etc. Add "local retail business of corner store variety" . Define "corner store variety" more clearly. 4. SECTION 20. (Area and Yard Regulations) Land area requirement of 10,000 square feet leave as is. Eliminate setback requirement of 30 ' . Discuss further: reverse frontage front yard and side yard requirements. Mr. Condon: I think we should assign some homework. Mr. Arndt: At the next meeting (to be held on August 3, 1970) we ' ll discuss the sections dealing with Two-Family Dwelling Districts, including zoning map Two-Family District aspects. Decision on Case #84 - Roy Schmoeckel petition: Mr. Arndt: I personally would recommend that we grant it. I wonder if Shorty (Bourdaghs) would want his house included it would make more sense to rezone the whole corner. On motion of Mr. Wihren, seconded by Mr.Condon, the petition of Roy Schmoeckel to rezone property at 114 E. Chestnut Street from Commercial to Multiple Dwelling was granted. ADJOURNMENT: On motion .of Kr. .Hohlt, seconded by Mr. Condon, the meeting adjourned at 10:45 P. M. STATE OF MINNESOTA CITY OF STILLWATER COUNTY OF WASHINGTON PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION In re: Petition of FINDINGS OF FACT AND Roy Schmoeckel RECOMMENDATION for Rezoning from CA (Commercial Area) to RB (Two-Family) under provisions of Ordinance 383, City of Stillwater. -------------------------------------- 1. That the petitioners desire to maintain the structure at 114 East Chestnut Street in essentially its exterior condition. 2. That the petitioners have presented evidence to the Planning and Zoning Commission evidencing solodity of said structure for a Two-Family dwelling, and that they have made adequate plans to insure that necessary fire safety and other public health standards are insured. 3. That the retention of this historic building in a state of adequate physical repair is desirable. 4. That continued maintenance and use of said structure can most adequately be assured by permitting the petitioners to put the structure on a paying basis. Based upon the above Findings of Fact, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council that this petition be Granted B � y DATED this 27thday of July 1970.