The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1990-07-05 CPC Packet9,U19c" July 5, 1990 THE STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET ON MONDAY, JULY 9, 1990 AT 7:00 P.M. IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF CITY HALL, 216 NORTH FOURTH BELT. AGENDA Approval of Minutes - June 11, 1990. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. CASE NO. SUP/9O-38 - A Special Use Permit to conduct an over -the -phone saga service out of a home at 1114 Sixth Avenue South in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Sheri LaCasse and Rohn L. Moretter, Applicants. 2. CASE NO. V/9O-40 - A Variance to the maximum lot coverage for an accessory building 1, u square feet allowed, 1,344 square feet requested) for the construction of a garage addition at 1341 Dallager Court in the RA, Single Family Residential District. Dan Michaelis, Applicant. 3. CASE NO. V/9O-41 - Variance to the sideyard setback requirements (three feet requested, five feet required) for the construction of a detached garage at 519 West Pine Street in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Walter Hagen, Applicant. CITY HALL 0 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 0 612-439-6121 STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATE: June 12, 1990 TIME: 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Gerald Fontaine, Chairman Glenna Bealka, Warren Pakulski, Don Valsvik, Angela Anderson, Duane Elliott, Rob Hamlin, Steve Russell, Community Development Director ABSENT: Judy Curtis, Jay Kimble The meeting was called to order by Gerald Fontaine at 7 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES ------------------- MOTION by Warren Pakulski, seconded by Duane Elliott, to approve the minutes of the meeting of May 14, 1990. (All in favor.) F'UBLIG HEARINGS --------------- CASE NO. V/90-19-Variance to the sideyard setback requirements for the addition to an existing garage and conversion of an existing garage into habitable living space at 1124 Parkwood Lane in the RA, Single Family Residential District. David Widmyer, Applicant. Lola Widmyer, applicant, presented the request to construct a twelve foot by twenty foot garage addition to the front of a home and to convert the back half of the garage into a family room. There will be window space only on the West side of the addition. The variance was approved by the City Council on May 1, 1990, however, when the Certificate of Survey was reviewed the ten foot sideyard setback from the South property line was actually six feet. A ten foot sideyard setback must be maintained for habitable living space. No audience comments. The conditions of approval remain unchanged. Motion by Duane Elliott, seconded by Warren Pakulski, to approve the variance subject to the conditions. Unanimously approved. CASE NO. V/90-27-Variance to the lot size requirements for the subdivision of a 13,400 square foot lot into two lots of 6700 square feet (7500 square feet required) at 1215 South Third Street in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Wallace Nelsen, Jr., Applicant. Applicant presented the request to subdivide an existing lot with an existing house into two lots. Applicant plans to improve the existing property and build a 301 by 401 (1200 sq. ft.) house on the adjacent property. Planning Commission June 12, 1990 Page 2 (Case No. V/90-27 Continued) Marilyn Peterson and Ken Carlson, residents in the area, stated opposition due to the density of houses in the area. Doug Carneth, neighbor, stated approval of the property being developed. Discussion followed on the density of houses in the area and drainage problems due to runoff. Motion to Deny by Warren Paku1ski, seconded by Glenna Bea1ka. Unanimous. CASE NO. V/90-29-Variance to the rearyard setback requirements (two feet proposed, five feet required) for the construction of an garage addition at 321 West Olive Street in the RCM, Multiple Family Residential District. Tire Parker and M. Calver, Applicants. Applicant presented plans to extend the existing garage 10 feet, over the concrete driveway. The roof and siding will be of the same materials. Denise Sample, 315 S. 6th Street, reviewed the addition and was not apposed to the addition. No further objections. Motion to approve by Rob Hamlin, seconded by Glenna Bea 1 ka, subject to the conditions as stated. Unanimous. CASE NO. V/90-30-Variance to the sideyard setback requirements (five feet required, two feet proposed) for the construction of a garage addition at 122 South Sherburne Street in the RB, Two Family Residential District. James Kallem, Applicant. Applicant presented the request to add an addition to an existing garage. The permit has been issued and the garage is partially complete. No audience comment. The conditions of approval remain unchanged. Motion to approve by Duane Elliott, seconded by Glenna Beal ka. Unanimously approved. CASE NO. SUP/90-32-Special Use Permit to conduct a mail order business out of an apartment at 1451 South Greeley Street (Apt. 111) in the RCM, Multiple Family Residential District. Cindy L. Multer, Applicant. Planning Commission June 12, 1990 Page 3 (Case No. SUP/90-32 Continued) Applicant presented the request to conduct a small mail corder business out of an apartment. No customers will be at the location. Deliveries will consist of office supplies. No audience comment. Conditions remain unchanged. Motion to approve by Rob Hamlin, seconded by Warren Pakulski. Unanimously approved. CASE NO. SUB/90-33-A PUD Amendment for Concept Approval of a sixty two unit Planned Unit Development on a thirteen acre parcel and final PUD approval for the fourteen unit First phase Development located between the Green's Townhomes at Oak Glen on McKusick Road in the CA, Single Family Residential District. Bruggemen Construction, Applicant. Applicant, Mr. Bruggeman, presented the request for preliminary concept approval. Discussion followed on the plans to redefine the easements and additional revisions due to utilities. Gary Vohs, resident Oakglen Townhomes, addressed the pricing of the homes. Emery Barette, Chairman Oakglen Association, expressed approval of the proposed plan, and expressed concerns that the current quality of construction continue in the area. Maintaining the current level of the quality of construction in the area remains a concern of the area residents. Commissioners agreed the setback requirements would be addressed at the final approval stage. Motion to approve by Warren Pakulski, seconded by Glenna Bealka, subject to the conditions as stated. Duane Elliott Abstained. Approved. CASE NO. PUD/90-34-Final Plat Approval for the first addition of a PUD Amendment consisting of a fourteen unit Planned Unit Development between the Greens Townhomes and the Townhomes at Oak Glen on Mcl'usick Road in the CA, Single Family Residential District. Bruggeman Construction, Applicants. Discussion followed on the request to modify a previously approved Planned Unit Development permit (PUD) reconfiguring and reducing the number of single family attached unit from seventy two to sixty two and final PUD approval of the fourteen unit first addition. Motion to approve by Warren Pakulski, seconded by Rob Hamlin, subject to the minimum setback. Duane Elliott opposed. Approved. Planning Commission June 12, 1990 Page 4 CASE NO. SUP/90-35-Special Use Permit for two offices in an existing residential structure (Arlington Apartments) located at 160-200 South Third Street in the RCM, Multiple Family Residential District. Richard Kilty, Applicant. Applicant presented plans to convert the existing apartments on the first floor of the Arlington Apartments into office spaces. Applicant stated the neighbor, Mr. Wheeler, is not opposed to the change. No audience comment. Motion by Duane Elliott, seconded by Warren Pakulski, subject to the conditions of approval as stated. Unanimously approved. CASE NO. V/90-36-Variance to the front and sideyard setback requirements for the construction of a parking structure along with improving an existing street easement at 160-200 South Third Street in the RCM, Multiple Family Residential District. Richard N,ilty, Applicant. Discussion followed on the request to construct a ten car parking structure, improving an existing street easement (Chestnut Street) as a driveway, and reconstructing a garage. Motion to approve by Rob Hamlin, seconded by Angela Anderson, subject to the conditions of approval as stated. Unanimously approved. CASE NO. V/90-28-Variance to the lot depth requirements (83 feet proposed, 100 feet required) for a subdivision of a 32,640 square foot lot into two lots of 9,960 square feet (83 feet lot depth) and 22,680 at 801 West Fine street in the RP, Two Family Residential District. James and Ingrid Lund, Applicants. Applicant, James Lund, and Jack Nelson, presented the request to subdivide a lot to build a new house on the adjacent lot. The conditions of approval remain unchanged. Motion to approve the division of the property by Duane Elliott, seconded by Rob Hamlin. Unanimously approved. CASE NO. V/90-37Variance to the frontyard setback requirements(15 feet proposed, 30 required) for the construction of a home -,-ri Willard Street (refer to Case V/90-28) between William and Martha Streets in the RED, Two Family Residential District. James and Ingrid Lund, Applicants. Planning Commission June 12, 1990 Page 5 Applicant presented the request to build a house on the proposed new lot, with a fifteen foot rather than the required thirty foot frontyard setback. Peter Uhling, 903 Willard, across from the property, expressed opposition to the variance due to the other houses on the block.. The other houses are set back from the street. Commissioners discussed the overall visual presentation, along with the potential hazards due to cars in the driveway which might extend into the walkway. Motion to deny by Rob Hamlin, seconded by Duane Elliott. Ayes -Duane Elliott, Rob Hamlin, Gerald Fontaine Nayes-Angela Anderson, Glenna Bealka, Warren Pakulski 3:3 Vote OTHER BUSINESS ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENT FOR THE STILLWATER INDUSTRIAL PARK CASE NO. ZAT/90-2-A zoning Text Amendment rescinding the IP-I Industrial Park Industrial Zoning District and replacing it with a BP -I Business Park -Industrial District. City of Stillwater, Applicant. Motion to approve by Duane Elliott, seconded by Warren Pakulski. Unanimously approved. CASE NO. ZAM/90-E-A Zoning Map Amendment designating lands in the Stillwater Business Park BP -I, Business Park -Industrial District. City of Stillwater, Applicant. Motion to approve by Duane Elliott, seconded by Rob Hamlin. Unanimously approved. CASE NO. ZAT/90-3-A Zoning Text Amendment rescinding the IP-Cl Industrial Park Commercial One District and replacing it with the BP -fir, Business Park Office District. City of Stillwater, Applicant. Motion to approve by Glenna Bea 1 ka, seconded ed by Rob Hamlin. Unanimously approved. Planning Commission June 12, 1990 Page 6 CASE NO. ZAM/90 -A Zoning Map Amendment designating lands in the Stillwater Business Rank BR-0, Business Park Office District. City of Stillwater,, Applicant. Motion to approve by Duane Elliott, seconded by Glenna Bealka. Unanimously approved. CASE NO. ZAT/90-4-A Zoning Text Amendment rescinding the IP-C Industrial Park -Commercial and replacing it with the BP-C Business Park. Commercial District. City of Stillwater, Applicant. Motion to approve by Rob Hamlin, seconded by Warren Pakulski. Unanimously approved. CASE NO. ZAM/90-4-A Zoning Map Amendment designating lands in the Stillwater Business Rank BP-C, Business Rank Commercial District. City of Stillwater, Applicant. Motion to approve by Warren Paku 1 sk i , seconded by Glenna Bea 1 k.a. Unanimously approved. MOTION to adjourn by Rob Hamlin, seconded by Glenna Bea 1 ka, at 8 : 45 p.m. (All in favor) PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO. SUP/90-38 Planning Commission Meeting: July 9, 1990 Project Location: 1114 Sixth Avenue South Comprehensive Plan District: Two Family Zoning District: RB Applicant's Name: Sherri J. LaCasse and Rohn L. Moretter Type of Application: Special Use Permit PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A Special Use Perrizit to conduct an over -the -phone sales and service business out of a home. DISCUSSION: The request is to conduct an over -the -phone sales and service business out of a home. This business will be strictly over -the -phone, service requests and supply orders placed by phone at 1114 Sixth Avenue South. The applicant's will then go to the distributors, pick up supplies, and deliver to the service call. On occasion, deliveries will be made to the stated address. The two applicants are the owners of the business and work on a full time basis. Rohn Moretter lives at the stated address. A part-time employee is needed to answer the phones and assist on particular jobs. The structure is a residential three-plex unit. The driveway located off Burlington Avenue is large enough to accommodate four cars. The existing parking demand for this structure according to the Parking Ordinance is 4.5 spaces with three covered and one for guest parking, or 5.5 spaces. This demand is not presently met. The demand for the business will be an additional three cars on the site which will include a delivery truck, a space for the other owner and a space for the part-time employee. Cars are presently parking off Burlington Avenue onto the site. There is no curb or gutter on this street so cars are able to park on the grass or on tree street at any angle. The applicants plan to place a ten foot by ten foot storage shed in tale rearyard, which will meet all setback requirements of the district. There is no garage or any other storage shed located on this site. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. No pool chemicals of any type shall be stored in the home or in the garage. 2. Deliveries shall be no more than two per week. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - CONTINUED. 3. No business sign shall be placed on the premises. 4. This use permit shall be reviewed upon complaint. 5. There shall be no additional staff working at this location. 6. All vehicles shall be located on -site. RECOMMENDATION: Determination of request. FINDINGS: The proposed use will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare and will be in harmony with the general purpose of the Zoning Ordinance. However, due to lack of parking, it does not meet the general purpose of the Parking Ordinance. ATTACHMENTS: - Letter from Applicants. - Application Form. - Letter dated July 24, 1989. Case Number Fee Paid Date Filed PLANNING ADMINISTIZATIVE FORM Street Location of Property: ___________ Legal Description of Property: ---------------------------------------- Sherri J. LaCasse Owner: Name RohnLMoretter _Q�I.QfTnta_pQ01Q an ___------_-J__________ Address 1114_ 6th Avenue South (BQhr�_____ phone: _439 _5632_ _-___------- ------ Applicant (if other than owner): Name -_-______________________________ Address ------------------------------ Phone: --------------- Type of Request.- ___ Rezoning ___ Approval of Preliminary Plat _X_ Special Use Permit ___ Approval of Final Plat ___ Variance ___ Other ------------------- Description of Request: Zc--'�.._-- _1Js��.'aLc_-� �'L�—--��yy�_ �_3Y.:._ri�fi�'_ _ �C�� _ �r�'i��LF—�,,.}��'�Z✓r ----------------------------------------- Signature of Applicaritt_ 1� Date of Public Hearing: _______ NOTE: Sketch of proposed property and structure to be drawn. o1= or at- tached, showing the following: 1. North direction.:';'- 2. Location of proposed structure on lot. r p YA .3 .- 3. Dimensions of front and side set -backs. a. Dimensions of proposed structure. 5. Street names. 6. Location of adjacent existing buildings. 7. Other information as may be requested. Approved ___ Denied ___ by the*Planning Commission on ----------- (date) subject to the following conditions: ____________ -�--�------ ----==sub ect tot ,e Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Council on 1 following conditions: ________________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------ Comments: (Use other side), TOTAL POOL COMPANY P.O. Box 728 Stillwater, MN 55082 (612) 439-5632 June 26, 1990 As stated on the application, the new owners are Sherri J. LaCasse and Rohn L. Moretter. Enclosed is a copy of the letter which was submitted to the City of Stillwater July 24, 1989 for a special work permit. The structure of our business is exactly the same as it was last summer. When a customer needs service work or supplies, they call and we set up a time to go to their house. We do not have customers coming to the house for supplies. We do have deliverys from U.P.S. or Speedy which is on the average of two times a week. If we have a large delivery from a freight company; such as a liner, we arrange the delivery to go to a business location. Rohn and Sherri are the only full time employees for Total Pool Company. When needed, we will hire someone to help on a particular job. This person is not a full time employee. We will be putting up a small shed to store any extra supplies which will not fit into our work vehicles. This shed has been approved by the owner who is Jack Krongard; owner of Krongard Construction Company. If there are any questions, please call us anytime at the above telephone number. Thank au, Sherri J. LaCasse P, M-4"�Tv� Rohn L. Moretter July 24, 1989 Total Fool Company Richard W. LaCasse 313 W. Churchill St. Stillwater, MN 550e2 612-439--5632 1, Richard W. LaCasse, am the owner of Total Pool Company which is located at the above address. The nature o•F my business is strictly service work can swi inmi ng pools artci free che7mi cal & accessory delivery. All contact wi. th ccssLarner's i. c1r_)ne aver the telephone." When a customer needs:; something for thr_i r. swi mmmi ng pool. , they call us at the above address to place thf=i r or der- or- to schedule a service call. The morning which the delivery is set up, we drive to our distributor to pick up the items; and then we deliver the items to the customers that same day. We do not have customers coming to our home to buy the items which does not cause any additional noise or traffic. On occasion, we will get a delivery from a distributor which is sent via U.P.S. or Speedy Delivery. The items which are delivered consist of one or two small packages. On an average, it happens once a week. The only o•the person who is i nvoi ved in my business. is m';- daughter Sherri LaCasse. Sherri. lives in this h_se so there are no additional cars; parked in front of our home. By Operating my business out of my home will not effect the neighborhood because there is no additional noise of traffic, which 1 understand is a major concern. ; If there are any other questions, please call ;nr_ anytime at the above telephone number. TI•-ianl: YOU, Richard W. LaCasse Owner PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO._V/90-40 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: July 9, 1990 PROJECT LOCATION: 1341 Dallager Court COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT: Single Family ZONING DISTRICT: RA APPLICANT'S NAME: Daniel Michaelis TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A variance to the maximum lot coverage allowed for the construction of a garage addition (1,000 square feet allowed, 1,344 square feet requested). DISCUSSION: The request is to construct a garage addition to an existing garage which would double its size from 672 square feet to 1,344 square feet. A 346.5 square feet section of this garage addition will be used as a workshop. The lot is quite large, approximately 18,000 square feet. The back section of the lot was recently acquired oy the applicant has almost doubled the size of the area. The proposed addition meets all the setback requirements for the district. The house and existing attached garage are set on the narrow area of the lot. The front of the garage can be viewed from the street but the depth of the structure cannot be seen due to the circular angle of the cul-de-sac and placement of the house and garage on the lot. The proposed garage addition is placed at a southeast angle. An addition to the garage would not be visually apparent as viewed from the street. CONDITIONS OF. -APPROVAL 1. The garage shall not be used for commercial purposes. 2. There shall be no additional accessory structures allowed on this lot. RECOMMENDATION: Approval. FINDINGS: The granting of this variance will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. spaces. ATTACHMENTS: Sit pe an. Application form. Case Number Fee Paid _I= -_______-_ - Date.Filed .PLANNING ADMINISTRATIVE FORM Street Location or Property: _�L�_G �� __-______ Legal Description o; Property: -_________-__---__-_________--____--_--_ Owner. Na ae n ___----____________---...___- Acldrass _Uay Phone:-- Aoolicc, other than owner): Nc:. ,e -_______w_____________________ Adcress------------------------------ Phone - Type o," Request.- ___ Rezoning ___ Approval of Preliminary Plat Special Use Permit -__ Approval of final. Pict _/_ Varianca _-_ Other ------------- .______ Description o; Reciuest: r, J_r�nr�nr�-t�1��r�_1?�s��r, Signature or Applicant. - Date, o; Public Hearing: ___-__--_-___-_____------__-_---_______------ 3'NOTE: Sketch of pr000sed property and structure to be drawn )n back 0-6 `his ion:.. or at- tacled, snowing the following: 1� 141514, 1. North direction- 2. Location of pr000sed structure on lot 3. Dimensions of front and side set -backs. 4. Dimensions of proposed structure. 4 5. Street narnes. b0l- " 6. Location of adjacent existing buildings. , n �; �3i, ��uu'•�.. 7. Other infor-mation as may be requested. ':i? Ar c�1 • Approved _-_ Denied ___ by the'Planning Commission on sublet: to the following conditions: -_— --------------------------- ---------- _.__ Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Council on ________________ sublet. to the 1 ,allowin conditions: 9----------------------------------------------- Comments: (Use other side) r-i —-r.'�}�ir=�.. �.-e-�-: • r, �w�::_ yeµ--�.:•��„-^_ `: �.,^'""�"-N,.-• �.""`,f!.r.. _ . r, �" � ' �_ • '?i;rr yam.._ _.�__ .. _�..-.,;.._:=.. _..._. __.....�.... �__.... _._ __._ . _..._ .. III �� v •�� - r � �' . , . •„ ' . .. ail zi LIB c ', . , �• �it' �Q * dl . .yr.-...V•r.........: �wrr...%y..�•.w�r�r.•,,.,�. - - +`.P 4�" � M � �r�i jr ••� 'I. -x, •"•'�_'T�_. `_I _i'='`T _sue, "r.. .. _... .. _ ... f •_ _ '.III F1 PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO. V/90-41 Planning Commission Meeting: July 9, 1990 Project Location: 519 West Pine Street Comprehensive Plan District: Two Family Residential District. Zoning District: RB Applicant's Name: Walter Hagen Type of Application: Variance PROJECT LOCATION: A variance to the sideyard setback requirements (three feet requested, five feet required) for the construction of a detached garage. DISCUSSION: Fhe request is to replace an existing single car garage with a new 24 ft. by 24 ft. garage. The sideyard setback for the proposed garage is three feet. The sideyard setback requirement in the RB, Two Family Residential District is five feet. The six foot rearyard setback meets the requirement for the district. The east property line is approximately two feet from the adjacent garage and is separated by a two foot retaining wall. If the proposed sideyard setback is less than three feet, the Uniform Building Code requirement for a one -hour fire rated wall must be adhered to and no openings would be allowed. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. All drainage from the roof shall remain on site. RECOMMENDATION: Approval. FINDINGS: Tile granting of this variance is necessary for the reasonable use of the land and that this is the minimum variance that will accomplish such purpose. ATTACHMENTS: - Application Form. - Site Plan. I W, 0� �c 109 Case Number Fee Paid _,j--7J- °u Date Filed _ /- 1 ___ PLANNING ADMINISTRATIVE FORM Street Location of Property: 7 a:r• g GAG o e-% ., r Legal Description of Property: Owner: Name ----------- � q Address -f S-- _____ Phone: r Abplicant (if other than owner): Name _ G �&r___I9 _ G' Address Type or" Request:' ___ Rezoning ___ Approval 'of Preliminary Plat Special Usa Permit ___ Approval of Final. Plat ariance ___ Other ----------- __---_ P Descri tion of Request: _1_ �/ �':'�' r r J %F-C.�'"-}_ r C_` Phi-�___ Signature rt Applicant. Date of Public Nearing: ------------------------------------ - NOTE: Sketch of proposed property and structure to be drawn )n back of t`us fog tached, showing the following:` z r: 1. North direction. - 2. Location or proposed structure on lot. 3. Dimensions of front and side set-bac"s. 4. Dimensions of proposed structure. 5. Street naves. 6. Location of adjacent e-xisting buiIdings. 7. Other iniornation as may be requested. Approved ___ Denied ___ by the'Planning Commission on ----------- (data subject to the following conditions: ____________ Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Council on _ ------------------------ ____________ subject to the tc lowing con i;;ons: ________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - Comments: (Use other side)